We could reasonably expect that the NVA would support candidates for Alderman-at-Large who share their concerns about the Austin Street development. Whether they suggest that you bullet-vote for Lynne LeBlanc or also support Jake Auchincloss as an independent (progressive) thinker, their strategy is most clearly to knock incumbents Johnson and Albright off the Board of Aldermen. But, who is supporting incumbents Johnson and Albright? Are they friends of the developers in the City or are they supported by and open to hearing the wishes and thoughts of the people they represent? If you don’t really know or if you have any doubt about their leanings, let me tell you about a breakfast invitation to O’Hara’s sent out by the prominent and ubiquitous attorney for most of the 40B projects in this City to a long list of lawyers, developers (from Robert and Geoff Engler to Cabot, Cabot and Forbes), housing advocates, builders, architects, political lobbyists, local surveyors (Verne and Joe Porter), real estate professionals, insurers, supporters of Engine 6, and accountants in Newton. Over 100 people were invited with these words:
“Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 10:59 AM Subject: Breakfast for Susan Albright and Marcy Johnson
There is a critical election in the Ward 2 Aldermanic race this year.
I hope that you can join us for breakfast on Wednesday, September 9th at O’Hara’s to meet Aldermen Susan Albright and Marcia Johnson, both incumbents who are seeking re-election. Susan and Marcy have dedicated themselves to improving the quality of life in Newton, and have been staunch supporters of housing opportunities for all and sound economic development in the City.
I hope to see you there.”
Note: I don’t know who attended or how much financial support was gathered. But, the most astute political aphorism by which one can judge bedfellows remains: “Follow the money!”
A most cynical post Sallee. Not surprising right before the election to start throwing around baseless “Follow the Money” accusations. So advocates for real affordable housing in Newton, which we so sorely lack, are now part of “developers circling the wagons”?
Many of us in Newtonville who are not at all involved in development or real estate strongly support Marcia Johnson and Susan Albright. They are hard working public servants who deserve to be re-elected for two years. It is quite sad that you suggest that they are being bought by “developers” during a campaign when they are just trying to do the best for all of Newton.
In the August 26 blog about 40Bs someone said, “Lawyers and developers make money at the expense of neighbors who randomly have their zoning protections violated. Of course, lawyers and developers also tend to be heavy contributors to politicians who support 40Bs.”
As Sallee says, “follow the money.” Geoff and Bob Engler are principals at SEB (http://s-e-b.com/who-we-are/). The Austin Street developer is a collaboration of SEB (Newton Tab, May 23, 2014).
I don’t see any conspiracy here. Susan and Marcia support helping return some of Newton to being affordable for seniors and lower income groups rather than wanting exclusivity. It so happens that 40Bs are a means to that end, although not a great one. And being supported by developers and others interested in building housing units to help make this happen is understandable.
They are the candidates who do listen to those of us who believe closing the gates to Newton will create a profound loss of character to our neighborhoods as they turn into bastions for the wealthy. I like that they do not have a no growth advocacy group behind them. Of course after reading NVA’s new statement that says supporters should not exercise their right to vote for two candidates in this race but place one vote for their candidate Lynne Leblanc, I know that the NVA is not representing residents’ interests at all, just their own.
I think it is very problematic when developers who have or will have projects before the board for a vote, explicitly run fundraisers for specific aldermen.
Such activities create the appearance of a quid pro quo relationship between those aldermen and the developers involved.
Both Marcia and Susan should not have allowed such an event to proceed.
It casts doubt on their objectivity when voting on projects such as Austin St.
It would be naive to expect that the fundraisers here expect nothing in return.
Based on this I would say that in order to ensure an objective vote in future development board actions, the best bet is to elect Auchincloss and Leblanc. Both candidates are also exceptionally capable and would be great assets to the Board.
Both Susan and Marcia have had plenty of time to make their contribution and it seems that, given this kind of association with developers, it is time for them to step aside and let a new set of Ward 2 reps take the reins.
I am not saying there is a conspiracy. Let’s just recognize that the developers have a financial interest in this election and they are behaving accordingly. If I were developer making a lot money off of Newton 40Bs, I would do exactly the same thing.
What Geoff said. These are not private citizens urging others to vote a certain way. I am very concerned about underlying assumptions and expectations being created, especially when items are brought before the board.
It’s one thing to support affordable housing. It’s something different to support large apartment buildings as a solution to affordable housing. And something entirely different to support the Austin Street proposal–a golden handshake deal that costs taxpayers million$, and nets less affordable units than a traditional 40B. Of course this gives me one more opportunity to use one of my favorite P.T. Barnum quotes… “There’s a sucker born every minute.” I’m pretty sure PT didn’t have any of Newton’s elected officials in mind when he spoke those words, but “if the shoe fits…”
Who, me, cynical? If they had agreed to go to a Communist Party fundraiser in their honor (and I really don’t know their political affiliations), or one hosted by PETA or by Donald Trump, wouldn’t you wonder why? Knowledge of the source of their funding should inform your vote. Good citizens who want Austin Street as proposed should vote for the incumbents. Good citizens who don’t like Austin Street as proposed should vote otherwise. I wonder if this “development” group (see above) was invited by this prominent 40B lawyer to a breakfast to support the two incumbents in prior election years…before Austin Street arose as an issue?
@Sallee: I’m a little confused here. Was this sent by a group and did it mention who that group was?
BRAVA !!! Sally. It’s telling it as it is.
There are more than the 2 alder women from Ward 2 who are in the throes of the development industry. Who are they ? Who support every increased density housing project proposed ? Who voted against the demolition moratorium ?
There are a coterie of aldermen who have agendas in support of housing at any cost to the character of the city. This is an election that can send them a message. Bravo NVA !
This thread of demeaning and ridiculous accusations that some developers are trying to buy votes especially since Susan Albright and Marcia Johnson have been advocates for affordable housing long before this election. This entire discussion on housing in Newton over the past few years is so snobbish and parochial that it really has altered my opinion of the City that I love. Now NVA is telling people how to vote insulting people’s Abington make up their own mind. I hope that the few people that participate on this blog don’t reflect the majority of the citizens of Newton. The people who make tremendous personal sacrifices do not deserve to be accused of being bought by developers or anyone else. Those of you who are against affordable housing can make your argument without disrespecting the views of those who support housing.
I suggest that you go to the OCPF website and check out the facts about who is contributing to each candidate. Put OCPF in your Google search and it will take you to the OCPF home page. You then click on “Browse registered filers and reports”. Once you get to that page, on the top menu bar there is a Search item that allows you put in a candidate’s last name. It will bring you to a page for the candidate you’re interested in.
You can find out:
1. Who contributed to a candidate and how much (Click on Data).
2. How much each candidate has raised and how much has been spent (Click on report).
If you’re concerned about campaign finance and who’s funding the candidates, this is the most factual and accurate source of information. It’s a very user friendly website that I use all the time.
@Greg: No group…this was an invitation by the pre-eminent attorney for 40B development in the City to a long list of people who include developers, attorneys, real estate professionals, etc. (See above). Who attended and who gave money, I don’t know.
@Howard: I understand your frustration as an affordable housing advocate. But Newton citizens have a right to know who funds their representatives’ candidacies. No, I don’t think Susan or Marcia can be “bought”, but I think their choice to raise funds from the pool of individuals that would have financial gain from the ASP was politically unwise. They could have said “no, thank you.”
@Sallee: Is there a reason you are withholding the name? Doing so only casts a negative light on everyone. You’ve suggested that developers are circling the wagons when in fact it seems like an attorney is exercising his or her right to lobby for his or her preferred candidate.
Sallee – Did you go to the OCPF website to find out who is funding the candidates?
It might be a good idea for you to check out who’s funding each of the candidates. It’s all right there for you to see.
@Howard: You said, “Now NVA is telling people how to vote insulting people’s (ability to) make up their own mind.”
If you think NVA is insulting voters, what about the Supporters of Austin Street who have an aggressive advertising and lobbying campaign promoting voting actions? Do you think they are also insulting the voters by telling them how to vote?
Both the NVA and the Supporters of Austin St. are within their legitimate rights to organize and shout out their support for issues or candidates. It illustrates that whatever our inclination in the development argument, we should first and foremost be aware that there is an issue and every single one of us can influence the outcome by voting.
@Jane: I actually did. Thanks for the web site notation.I noticed the breakfast was on August 26. I really want to circle back and see the next candidate reporting period! If I am reading the contributions correctly, it looks like Susan hasn’t reported Aug 26 yet. Perhaps, Marcia did, but I will wait ’til the next reporting period to check that out! It’s interesting to see the individual Party member contributions (but don’t forget…most voters in Newton (myself included) are unaffiliated).
Actually, Sallee, it’s important to view the entire history of contributions for each candidate rather than just the most recent ones. I’d suggest looking at contributions for each candidate over the last year or so.
@Sallie, Austin Street supporters are not telling people how to vote but providing information on why people should vote for certain candidates. They are giving factual information on the project and not distorting the truth as others are doing. Telling people that all the parking will be lost is not the truth, telling people that if built Austin will be like Cabrini Green in Chicago is not the truth. All of the people who say they support affordable housing but not Austin Street never give an alternative way of developing it. The City will be stuck with 40B because it deserves it.
We should all be troubled by this thread of conversation. No one should take lightly the accusations made above.
If anyone believes any of our elected officials have voted against their conscience because of graft, then please do investigate the contributions — of all 24 aldermen — and contact the Attorney General’s office.
If, however, the suggested investigation is anything less than comprehensive, if it singles out specific aldermen with whom certain parties may disagree on an issue, selected donations and not the whole picture, this is nothing but a smear campaign, a witch hunt.
@John Sisson: No accusations have been made or were intended. It is an observation that a well known attorney who appears before the BOA regularly, representing clients who wish to develop properties in Newton, invited a list of individuals to a breakfast to support the candidacy of two sitting Aldermen. All of that is completely within the attorney’s rights. The list of over 100 names, included those of architects, developers, surveyors, real estate professionals, etc. The letter began with: “There is a critical election in the Ward 2 Aldermanic race this year.” It is not hard to imagine from the written language of the invitation what is being implied as critical about the Ward 2 election.
How is this a smear campaign or witch hunt? Either the invitees attended or gave money or they didn’t.
Sorry Sallee but your original post — and headline — read exactly like an “accusation.” The story you are telling many comments later — and others like Adam are filling in — is vastly different from what you were alleging in your original post. Developers were not circling the wagons. An unnamed attorney (why unnamed?) and I presume a Newton taxpayer and voter, invited power brokers like Adam and I presume from your very vague post clients, friends, etc. to meet his candidates of choice. Candidate meet and greets are nothing new and hardly illegal or even sketchy. And as Jane and others suggest if there really is something rotten happening we’ll see it soon enough in the finance reports.
Until then, I’d file this under: Nothing to see here.
@Howard Haywood – Vast majority of people in this city, that we ALL love, voted to have a strong say in development and use of “surplus” land. More importantly, EVERY single 40B has been opposed by people living in vicinity.
Neighbors and citizens are opposed to senseless development – elected officials should listen. Ironically, I find them beholden to their ideology instead.
Finally – Someone please correct me if wrong – but the statement – Seniors benefit from affordable housing, is baloney! There is a process, and lottery for affordable housing. So seniors – good luck getting through the process. IF there is data/evidence to the contrary – pl post.
Sallee, although I did not attend, I also got an invite to this breakfast, and I’m not exactly a real estate powerhouse or political financier. There were three names on the invite as hosts, names of well-known and well-respected community activists who also, as far as I know, do not fit into your conspiracy theory either. Is it possible this breakfast was attended by a more traditional crowd?
It’s ridiculous to infer that the incumbents are being bought. The developers are simply supporting candidates that share their desire to move forward with the project. It’s totally transparent.
But, I am starting to wonder if well meaning affordable housing advocates are just unwittingly being used as PR tools by the developers.
@Charlie: Surely you’re not suggesting that affordable housing just magically appears by itself? Housing –affordable or not — needs to be built, a.k.a developed by someone. And what does one call people who develop? That right, developers!
And if you’re not suggesting that are you suggesting that affordable housing advocates are stupid? They understand what the trade offs are.
To be clear, I was not invited by the aforementioned attorney. Unless there were two breakfasts at O’Hara’s on September 9th, the attorney was merely passing along the same invitation I got (hosted by resident activists and likely affordable housing advocates) to like-minded supporters, as Charlie said, or hosting his own event in some parallel universe to the wealthy and powerful. Too bad I missed the opportunity to use my new found wealth and influence!!
Reading this thread, I find myself thinking how much easier life would be if I could see things as clearly black & white as so many seem to. Instead, I see that while many denser developments add housing diversity and some much-needed affordable housing units, they also bring many luxury units that are out of the reach of many families and empty nesters. Older and smaller housing is replaced with new construction; on the one hand, its great because everyone’s property value go up, but on the other, basic affordability goes down. Development advocates say that development opponents want to close the door and Newton will be only for the rich, while opponents say that moderate housing is being replaced by luxury housing, which is creating a Newton that is only for the rich and for a limited number of people who qualify for subsidized housing. It seems clear to me that a new development composed of 75% luxury units and 25% affordable units simultaneously has *both* positive *and* negative consequences. I don’t see any way through this that doesn’t. And I think that anyone, on any side of this issue, who refuses to acknowledge that, is doing their side – and the community – a great disservice.
The invite I saw was from one person…the lawyer mentioned above. Adam was not on the long list of invitees!
What Tricia said. (as usual)
Sallee:
You’ve got to be kidding me. Follow the money? Actually, follow the issues. I understand that the various 40B and development issues have caused some anger in your village (and with you), but there is a distinct difference between typical political fundraising (building a coalition of folks who support your work) and the insinuation that somehow the incumbents are being bought and sold by the fact that this invite went to several developers. It also went to most of the affordable housing activists. And my gosh, they invited the lawyers. Swoon….
I’m glad you’ve joined this blog, and I’ve appreciated many of your posts. But this one was beneath you.
Charlie, as for the affordable housing coalition being used as “tools” of the developers, let me put forth an alternative theory. The affordable housing folks know how freaking difficult it is to build and maintain affordable housing in this community and in the Commonwealth. 40B was creating as a compromise. It happens to work as a method to build affordable housing without use of the limited subsidies from the federal govt. A lot of us support it. We recognize the painful part of the compromise, which is a loss of local control. Pretty sure you’ve been around long enough to meet some of the affordable housing activists around the Commonwealth, and I’m guessing you have enough common sense to realize that intelligent folks can eat food together to support a common candidate without agreeing on all things and without being fools.
What Tricia said.
Sam S – The thinking is that these apartments help seniors who are selling theirs homes and therefore have proceeds to invest will have the funds to pay for an apartment in the city. Being of that generation, it’s what I see people doing.
Let’s stick our heads in the sand and drop this thread and jump on over to Gregs new ” who will you vote for Thursday” ?” It’s far more relevant. NOT !
@Blueprint: I’m pretty sure Albright, Auchincloss, Barton, Johnson and LeBlanc think tomorrow’s vote is pretty darn important. I do too.
Also, I’m confident most participants here are able to follow more than one discussion at the same time.
Sam S., your statement,”Seniors benefit from affordable housing, is baloney!, ” could not be truer. We have seen an incredible run up up in housing prices over the last 60 years. The beneficiaries are people who have owned homes for the long run. These people tend to be, no surprise, seniors. Seniors have the opportunity to sell their large houses, move to something smaller, and pocket some nice appreciation.
@Greg-
One does not need to be a fool to be used by powerful interests. It PR positioning and it happens all the time. Are you suggesting that a developer with millions at stake would or should not use every tool possible to overcome neighborhood resistance?
I continue to believe this project is part of a larger set of goals for some. Greater density, building 800 units, casting aside neighborhood concerns in the name of a misguided concept of greater good and political aspirations.
My common sense (thanks Fig!) tells me that building large scale residential developments which will make Newton more urban, and less suburban, less green, and puts even greater pressure on the school system is not a good thing. That’s a much larger discussion than affordable housing.
What should also not be surprising, to the many seniors living on fixed incomes who have lived in Newton for many years, and dutifully paid their mortgages and their taxes, is that the proceeds from the sale of their modest homes does not even come close to covering the cost of another “down-sized” home in Newton–let alone their retirement. What is surprising, as well as disheartening, is the utter lack of empathy toward such seniors coming from some other Newton residents who are perhaps more affluent and have fewer worries about making ends meet. Making it easier for seniors to age in place and stay in Newton is something all housing advocates want, and a cause that Ald. Albright and Ald. Johnson have dedicated their political careers to achieving. They should be applauded for their courage and commitment to affordable housing.
@SamS
You’Re exactly right Sam. And before 40B every single attempt to build less expensive housiNg in many suburban communities were also always opposed by those in the vicinity. Like it or hate it, that’s the exact genesis of the 40B “anti snob zoning 40B” regulations.
@Ted. You quoted something similar to “you can pick you opinions but not your facts,” many times. Don’t forget your own advice. Downsizing is selling a house with more square-footage and buying a house with less square-footage. You were on the zoning board, right? I have the assessors’ database. I have not looked, but I am willing to bet that homes with more square-footage, on average, sell for homes with less square-footage. Do you want to take me up on that bet? If I am right, a senior who downsizes, on average, benefits from UNAFFORDABLE housing prices.
Sorry for typo, “on average, sell for MORE THAN homes with less square-footage.” I am crossing my fingers Ted takes the bet.
As a senior who has downsized to a smaller “affordable” single family home at half the price of the “senior Apartments ” being foisted on the community , I am here to say that the last place I would hope to find my self living in any sort of congregate situation is a nursing home. I’ve worked all my life to be able to escape the throes of Brookline and Cambridge urban apartment life, to live here in Newton and can’t imagine ( I know , I have a limited imagination ), there is any real demand for further senior housing projects here. This is a myth perpetuated by ambitious politicians to further their own narcissistic agendas.
Bill, you paid about a half million dollars for your “affordable” home a number of years back. Then and now, that price is beyond the reach of most of the middle class, let alone the working class and seniors of fixed incomes.
Jeffrey, square footage is not the only factor that affects price. When demand exceeds supply, the price also goes up, which is pretty much what we have here in Newton. For downsizing seniors, there is very little supply of housing that is affordable. And not everyone is downsizing from a spacious four bedroom single family home worth over a million dollars. They bought what they could afford 30 or 40 years ago or more, and now they mostly have to look outside Newton for anything they can afford and still have something to live on. Virtually the only housing they can afford in Newton is subsidized and/or deed restricted to remain permanently affordable.
Regarding seniors, I would also like to offer the fact that seniors who “downsize” are not always only looking for “affordable” housing – it is also a specific style of living that they seek. One floor living in a apartment or condo, so that maintenance is easier. In order to find such housing, they typically need to leave the city that they have called home for decades, and we loose their wisdom and sense of history. Encouraging our seniors to remain here by meeting their housing needs can only enhance the quality of life in Newton.
@ Greg.
Indeed tomorrow’s vote is important, but Albright , Auchincloss, Barton , Johnson and LeBlanc at this point I’m sure, could care less as to who among the august few who participate on this blog , will be voting for who. They already have that figured out.
@Blue: Over the years our analytics have shown that Village 14 has significantly more visitors than participants, at times as many as 100 to 1. So we may know where the vast majority of Village 14 participants stand but no one can possibly know where the large number of visitors who don’t comment stand.
In addition, I can imagine we have readers here who may still be undecided about which of the three challengers they should vote for. Do you vote for the one or two who most strongly represent your views or the one or two who have the best chance of unseating either or both incumbents? Or do you bullet vote for Barton hoping she will beat Auchincloss or LeBlanc because you’ve decided she’d be a weaker contender in November against Johnson or Albright?
I also know of at least three people who’ve told me that they’re considering voting for Auchincloss and one of the two incumbents.
So no, I don’t know. And neither do you.
What NativeNewtonian said.
@NativeNewtonian. I think we agree that Newton seniors who have owned a home in Newton for a long time have a lot of home equity that can be used to buy another home. You say that seniors are not looking for affordable housing per se. If so, why is there a need to give developers the ability to violate zoning laws to provide housing for these seniors?
I think a lot of seniors prefer the one story housing, but developers make more money on multi-story housing. They make more money on multi-story housing because seniors do not want to pay the market price. Although seniors who have lived in Newton for awhile can afford to pay for one story housing, they think it is too expensive and move elsewhere. I don’t think a neighbor should put up with violated zoning and I don’t think tax payers should bear the cost of “affordable” senior housing when a senior can afford market priced housing (see first sentence again).
40B is a state law. Like it or not, the developers are not violating any laws. If you want to change the state law, it’s best to approach the state legislators.
@Jane. Next time I will say “legally violate zoning laws” or “legally circumvent zoning laws.” My bad.
I’m equally surprised that this was posted by Sallee.
It is basically an anonymous (by your choosing) e-mail you claim is an invitation to 100 anonymous people. You claim to know their occupations, yet others on here have said people not in those occupations were invited too. You didn’t attend and you don’t know who went or even if they paid.
You have started a thread with nothing on which to base your insinuations but you have received exactly the inferences you wanted – speculation about the ethics of the incumbents. If this had been used as the basis for a paper entitled “Developers’ circling their wagons,” it would have received a failing grade.
On the OCPF website, I find Lynne LeBlanc has received contributions from lawyers and real estate brokers. Why aren’t you insinuating things about those? Because they mean nothing, just like whatever you are implying about the incumbents?
Jeffrey, I am curious to know where seniors can currently find much in the way of one floor apartment or condo living in Newton. Particularly in areas where they can safely walk to amenities.Part of the concept of “liveable communities” for our growing population of seniors includes walkability, and being part of a community. A location such as Austin Street is perfect.
I always love it when I’m part of a vast generalization, such as what seniors, baby boomers and women want. Seniors is a vague term generally used in statistics to serve a purpose just like all generalizations when, in fact, we are all different individuals with as many different ideas of life between 55 and 105 as there are numbers of us.
I know seniors who are still working either because they need to or want to for different reasons. I know a lot of seniors. Some either live in homes they have lived in for years and plan to stay there, knowing changes may be necessary later. Some of them are afraid of more overrides because they are fine for now but their passage means their taxes go up. Some have taken out home equity loans over the years as home prices have risen to stay afloat so they will not reap the financial benefits most of you are claiming.
Others have downsized to apartments, condos and smaller homes for a variety of reasons. Some are in one floor condos, such as the ones at Chestnut Hill, others in first floor apartments in two family homes, and a few moved to smaller homes. A few did move out of Newton to family homes on the Cape, to condos in Cambridge or to Florida. Two live in publicly financed housing in Auburndale and Newton Highlands.
These people are committed to community service and are volunteering for everything imaginable in Newton. They are the mentors, the tutors, the ones who help you choose a Medicare plan and teach you how to use an iPad, the greeters, the planners, the doers. Newton would be lost without them.
Also the homeowners I know would not qualify for “affordable” housing because of their assets if not their income. The assets applicants are allowed are quite small, barely encompassing a decent vehicle.
Additionally overrides not only affect homeowners. Two-Family homeowners, apartment building owners, building owners, condo building owners raise their rents or HOA fees when they pay more in taxes and the people living in them already pay a higher percentage of MA state income taxes than the wealthy do because of the flat tax rate. We need to do something to keep them from being shafted in Newton.
@Ted – in discussing seniors who would like to downsize but who are not coming from a $1M+ home, you wrote:
Here’s what I keep getting stuck on: it seems to me that many of these folks will not qualify for the subsidized housing, since even a modest home in Newton returns a sizable sum. But at the same time, the market rate units in these developments (which are the vast majority of the units) are toward the “luxury” end of the real estate spectrum, so the rent exceeds what seniors living on a fixed income are able to afford/willing to pay. So how do these developments help these folks? How do we get new development that includes both subsidized and low-to-mid level units just for seniors? There doesn’t seem to be any incentive for 40b developers to create these kinds of developments (those with much more modest market rate units, or developments restricted to seniors.)
Tricia and Marti, the key to providing options for downsizing seniors is a supply of housing they can afford. No one project can meet all those needs. But your point is well taken. We need a mix of housing that does not currently exist. For that, we need to create housing opportunities and that will mean adding more, smaller units to the city’s housing stock that are not going to be priced beyond the means of those who live here now.
@Ted: Do any of the developments that are currently on the horizon fall into the market you are describing?
@NativeNewtonian. There is a ton of housing for seniors. My mom (80 years old last month) has been in multiple places that she found very easily. Google me, email me, and I can tell you how to find someplace. Lynne LeBlanc in the last debate found 450 two bedroom listings (I think that this is the number, correct me if I am wrong, maybe it is 450).
We rented for a year after selling the “family” home. We then bought a house on a smaller lot and with less square footage. The rental was by far the most economical form of housing.
As a home owner, try adding up the various insurance costs, the maintenance and repair costs, the unexpected broken appliance, a new roof or boiler if you’ve lived in the house for long time, painting the exterior of the house, energy efficiency measures. Imagine you’re over 60 and you now need to pay for snow removal, lawn and property upkeep, or any task that requires heavy lifting. Clearing gutters over 60? No way anyone in my family is getting on a ladder. Many of those small tasks that you do on your own now you’ll soon be hiring someone to do them for you. It’s not just the fixed income, but it’s the rising costs of owning a home that motivate people to move to an apartment.
That survey that said 88% of Newton residents wanted to stay in their own homes? I was part of that 88% fifteen years ago. I see things through a different lens now.
Gail- Given the financial picture I described, a number of these rental units fall into the middle class range.
Jeffrey – the accurate quote would be “to provide housing for these seniors”. Once again, it’s the state law. If you don’t like the state law, then go to the legislative body that’s in a position to advocate for a change it.
I Find Sallee Lipshitz comments extremely offensive. Most knowledge and thoughtful people support some development in Newton. For people like yourself to start name calling lowers the discourse in the city to the level of national politics.
Gail, the Mayor has hired KRG as a consultant to come up with a housing strategy. The next meeting to discuss their findings based on their housing market analysis is scheduled for October 1 at 6:30 in the Little Theater at Newton North.
The planning department has been trying to encourage builders and developers seeking special permits to fit that niche by building more, smaller units that would be more easily affordable to the middle class and seniors on fixed or modest incomes. Smaller units on the same footprint means more density, of course, which has provide to be a hard sell for some of the aldermen as well as some (not all) neighbors of proposed projects. So, even if developers come forward with projects that address those needs, there is no guarantee they will have their projects approved.
Despite our past differences, the Mayor and I recently had a heart to heart and agreed we would like to work together on the city’s housing strategy to help to ensure its success. I don’t want to speak for him, but I think we agree that significantly increasing the number of housing units that are truly affordable is our common goal. That does not mean we will always agree on how to get there, but arriving at a shared goal is half the battle.
Thanks Ted. I’m happy to hear that.
Jeffrey, my mother-in-law, age 90, found no place in Newton and as of last month resides in Needham. As a 20+ year member of our city’s council on aging, I respectfully disagree, as do most of the individuals who answered our needs assessment survey in 2013. Your mom is fortunate that she found adequate housing.
@NativeNewtonian. It took my wife and me 6 months to find a house, plus we were included Brookline in our search. My mom found a lot of options quickly. I don’t think my mom is lucky. Seniors seem to me to have an easier time finding housing in Newton than the typical person. Plus, unlike younger people, if they already owned a home in Newton they have had the fortune of experiencing one of the greatest housing rallies of all time. One thing to remember is that no housing option is ever perfect, everyone has to make some sacrifice. I wish I had a two car garage, a bigger yard, a bigger kitchen, etc. Newton is a tough housing market for everyone.
Jeffrey, the needs of most seniors are complex.In order to keep them part of a community, most do not want single family residence living. They seek apartment / condo living. They seek it in a location where they can safely get to those places which they need – supermarkets, banks, doctors, They need the stimulation of being part of something bigger – the opportunity to volunteer, to attend arts & cultural events, take part in adult education as a learner or teacher. Check out the World Health Organization’s or AARP’s description of what a livable city is. Are we obligated to provide this environment for our seniors? Well…no. But the type of community that is good for our seniors is good for everyone. Could my mother in law have a found a small SFR where she would be isolated? Of course. A condo isolated from a village center? Of course. In fact, that’s where she moved from. You may understand your mother’s situation but, if you believe that seniors have an easy time finding appropiate housing in Newton, you clearly do not understand what the majority of seniors are looking for. Our department of senior services conducted a detailed needs assessment in late 2013. Google it. You may (or may not) find it edifying.
@Joy:I made an observation and reported it! If it walks ike a duck, quacks like a duck…