On Sunday the Board of Aldermen Chambers were packed as city officials and residents came to celebrate diversity and inclusiveness. It was a wonderful opportunity to hear what the City and the State do for immigrants and refugees. I did not even know there was a State Coalition advocating for foreign newcomers nor that the Newton clergy was involved.
One Syrian refugee gave a moving talk. Several alders gave up some of their Sunday afternoon too.
Unfortunately, no one mentioned the loss of diversity of housing options in Newton, as ranches and capes are being razed all over town, replaced by MacMansions that are only affordable to multi- millionaires. Another 100 demolitions this year!
A central allure to the US is based in capitalist freedom, the ability to explore creative ways for the building of wealth thru business enterprise, whether one is a baker, banker, or home builder. Attempting to control personal real property, i.e. real estate, thru zoning restrictions might be considered by some as a field by which government should not ought attempt to control.
‘to improve, is to change; to perfect is to change often’ – Winston Churchill’
Ms. Albeck, should you not like the use to which those parcels are put, there is nothing stopping you from acquiring them for whatever the going rate may be. You could then do with them as you please. Alternative, you could petition the City to purchase those lots (again at market rate) and use them for whatever purposes you seem to think are more suitable.
It strikes me as patently unfair to deprive the sellers the benefits that have accrued over the time they have held the property. They invested in that real estate likely with the expectation of seeing a rise in value. The value did rise and now they wish to realize the profit. Having done nothing wrong (indeed having made a wise investment), it would be wrong to use the zoning laws to take from them what is very much their right to enjoy.
Without adding more affordable housing to the mix, it sounds like the question is whether we value diversity in Newton between multi-millionaires and the mere millionaires. #newtonproblems
Generally speaking, what’s missing from most “Diversity and Inclusion” conversations is 1) lack of definition, 2) lack of understanding of how increasing diversity and inclusion can be good for all, and 3) a specific plan of action to create an environment where all members of the community feel welcomed/comfortable.
As a law student, I was president of the largest student body organization in the country. At my school, although the “Diversity and Inclusion” phrase was used quite a bit, it was clear that more needed to be done to produce results. Consequently, once I took over, what we did was unprecedented. By only investing slightly more funding into our Diversity and Inclusion Committee (and more importantly, appointing a fantastic team with a proven track record of effectiveness), we were able to increase the output of this committee by more than 1,000%. For example, for the first time ever, we hosted an outstanding Diversity and Inclusion week, we got diverse students to participate in the Board of Trustee decision-making process, and we held consistent events with a specific purpose throughout the entire year. We even worked with the other Boston law schools to organize the first ever New England Mental Health Symposium. By focusing on results from day one, and because our goal was to significantly, tangibly “leave it better than you found it,” instead of just “working at” making a difference, things changed for the better. Looking back, it’s clear that we had great success because there was a clear picture of success to work toward; there were appropriate, realistically aggressive plans for being successful that were developed, implemented and modified when appropriate; And all relevant accountabilities were defined, communicated and implemented as intended.
From an outsiders perspective, notwithstanding the good intent of our political leadership, I believe that we can do better at making all feel welcomed in Newton. And that’s coming from someone who has been stood up by multiple Newton officials or completely ignored when I reach out to offer advice on such topics.
Isabelle,
Since Chez Albeck is currently rated by Zillow at $1.7m, I find you comment about McMansions only being affordable by multi-millionaires a wee bit hypocritical.
It’s OK for you to live in a nice house, but when someone else — people like me — wants to replace their worn-out old house with something better, then it’s not OK?
And as a representative of the NVA you bleat about housing diversity, yet this very same group fought against the Austin St development, to preserve a parking lot?
Riiiiiiiiiiiight.
Isabelle, so would you like any restrictions on how much and to whom you could sell your house? Or is that reserved for others?
In addition, posting about a moving story from a Syrian refugee and concluding with Millionaires and McMansions being left out of the discussion attempts to create a parallel that doesn’t exist.