The Newton League of Woman Voters sent a letter to the charter commission reminding them that many members of the public are interested in seeing a smaller city council.
In our experience helping collect the more than 8,500 signatures required to establish this Charter Commission, the opportunity to reduce the size of our City Council was by far the most compelling reason Newton voters chose to sign that petition. Ask any signature collector, and you will hear that the quickest way to gain a voter’s interest was to mention that a Charter Commission would be able to propose a change to the size of the then Board of Aldermen. Across the city, pens were seized with gusto.
They read their letter during yesterday’s public hearing. We received great public feedback from many members of the public and several City Councillors as well.
This is obviously going to be a difficult decision for us. If any of you have thoughts on the matter, please share them here or email us at [email protected].
Thank you for your participation in and attention to this important process.
They read their letter during yesterday’s public hearing. We received great public feedback from many members of the public and several City Councillors as well.
This is obviously going to be a difficult decision for us. If any of you have thoughts on the matter, please share them here or email us at [email protected].
Thank you for your participation in and attention to this important process.
PS. The festivities will continue tonight. Details:
Round Table Discussion with Current and Former Newton Aldermen / Councilors
Thursday, March 31st, 7:30 pm, City Hall, City Council Chambers
Invited Panel:
Ruth Balser, State Representative, former 8-year member of Board of Aldermen, Ward 8 Ward Alderman
Scott Lennon, President, Newton City Council, 14-year member of Board / Council, Ward 1 Ward Alderman and Alderman/Councilor-at-Large, Ward 1
Cheryl Lappin, Vice President, Newton City Council, 14-year member, Ward 8 Ward Councilor
George Mansfield, former 26-year member of Board of Aldermen, 11 years as Vice President, past chair of Land Use, Finance, and Public Facilities Committees, Ward 6 Ward Alderman
Brian Yates, 28 year member of City Council, Ward 5 Councilor-at-Large, past chair of Zoning and Planning Committee
John Stewart, former 12-year member of the Board of Aldermen, longtime charter reform leader, Alderman-at-Large Ward 4
PS. The festivities will continue tonight. Details:
Round Table Discussion with Current and Former Newton Aldermen / Councilors
Thursday, March 31st, 7:30 pm, City Hall, City Council Chambers
Invited Panel:
Ruth Balser, State Representative, former 8-year member of Board of Aldermen, Ward 8 Ward Alderman
Scott Lennon, President, Newton City Council, 14-year member of Board / Council, Ward 1 Ward Alderman and Alderman/Councilor-at-Large, Ward 1
Cheryl Lappin, Vice President, Newton City Council, 14-year member, Ward 8 Ward Councilor
George Mansfield, former 26-year member of Board of Aldermen, 11 years as Vice President, past chair of Land Use, Finance, and Public Facilities Committees, Ward 6 Ward Alderman
Brian Yates, 28 year member of City Council, Ward 5 Councilor-at-Large, past chair of Zoning and Planning Committee
John Stewart, former 12-year member of the Board of Aldermen, longtime charter reform leader, Alderman-at-Large Ward 4
I have exceedingly more respect for Newton’s voters than for the Yale students purported to have recently signed (with gusto) a petition to Repeal the First Amendment.
Perhaps several years ago they would have eagerly grabbed the pen, before the recent spate of zoning, transportation and housing challenges that have upset residents, awakening them to their need for representation that has made them more aware that a large and diverse City Council gives them a better chance to have their views and concerns considered seriously.
I think they would consider more carefully today! By the way…when approached by League volunteers, the argument given to me was that the Charter hadn’t been studied in over 30 years and needed to be updated!
I have exceedingly more respect for Newton’s voters than for the Yale students purported to have recently signed (with gusto) a petition to Repeal the First Amendment.
Perhaps several years ago they would have eagerly grabbed the pen, before the recent spate of zoning, transportation and housing challenges that have upset residents, awakening them to their need for representation that has made them more aware that a large and diverse City Council gives them a better chance to have their views and concerns considered seriously.
I think they would consider more carefully today! By the way…when approached by League volunteers, the argument given to me was that the Charter hadn’t been studied in over 30 years and needed to be updated!
The Commission needs to get this issue right. Many people will vote against the changes if it doesn’t contain the reduction. This is the one tricky area of the process.
The Commission needs to get this issue right. Many people will vote against the changes if it doesn’t contain the reduction. This is the one tricky area of the process.
Tom:
I think you are right, but any one position could end up being a “poison pill”, so the commission needs to be careful about not over reaching on any issue.
Additionally, it is my understanding, the commission can put forward more than one version of a revised charter for the people to vote on- and I strongly suggest they do that.
Tom:
I think you are right, but any one position could end up being a “poison pill”, so the commission needs to be careful about not over reaching on any issue.
Additionally, it is my understanding, the commission can put forward more than one version of a revised charter for the people to vote on- and I strongly suggest they do that.
@tomsheff, I think you’re right Tom. However getting it right may mean keeping the same size when the trade off is sending some of the work to non-elected persons, either appointed or city staff. Many people I spoke to when I was collecting signatures, those that knew Newton had a charter, asked about a reduction in size but many of those were wary of giving up control, via the voting booth, of important decisions. Of course the 0ther 90% thought the city was running fine and would not see the need to make any changes.
I would not be surprised if people were to vote against anything that looked to be a substantial change since that could make a good thing go bad. The real key will be be selling any changes to the voting population when the revisions are finalized.
@tomsheff, I think you’re right Tom. However getting it right may mean keeping the same size when the trade off is sending some of the work to non-elected persons, either appointed or city staff. Many people I spoke to when I was collecting signatures, those that knew Newton had a charter, asked about a reduction in size but many of those were wary of giving up control, via the voting booth, of important decisions. Of course the 0ther 90% thought the city was running fine and would not see the need to make any changes.
I would not be surprised if people were to vote against anything that looked to be a substantial change since that could make a good thing go bad. The real key will be be selling any changes to the voting population when the revisions are finalized.
It’s been awhile, but the issue of a smaller Board/Council has been the subject of a ballot box vote before. Residents voted for a smaller BoA, and were basically ignored. I agree with Tom Sheff. The formation of a Charter Commission was in large part driven by this issue.
It’s been awhile, but the issue of a smaller Board/Council has been the subject of a ballot box vote before. Residents voted for a smaller BoA, and were basically ignored. I agree with Tom Sheff. The formation of a Charter Commission was in large part driven by this issue.
@Mike: There have been several hot issues in the last couple of years that may have convinced voters that they would be better served with a larger Council. If that Council-size vote were taken today and coupled with the possibility/suggestion/realization that non-elected bodies would determine Special Permit decisions, the outcome might be very different.
@Mike: There have been several hot issues in the last couple of years that may have convinced voters that they would be better served with a larger Council. If that Council-size vote were taken today and coupled with the possibility/suggestion/realization that non-elected bodies would determine Special Permit decisions, the outcome might be very different.
While I agree that any issue will have its supporters and detractors and the side that doesn’t get what it wants may vote against the charter cause they didn’t get their way. That being said the size of the council is the most we;; known and divisive issue. While you might not have a position on giving some responsibility away for special permits, you very well may know and understand that 24 councilors are extremely high…part time or not. In my opinion, this is the do or die issue for a lot more folks than any other issue.
While I agree that any issue will have its supporters and detractors and the side that doesn’t get what it wants may vote against the charter cause they didn’t get their way. That being said the size of the council is the most we;; known and divisive issue. While you might not have a position on giving some responsibility away for special permits, you very well may know and understand that 24 councilors are extremely high…part time or not. In my opinion, this is the do or die issue for a lot more folks than any other issue.
Just to add a counter, there are many thoughtful and involved Newton residents who never agreed with the League’s recommendations, and don’t feel represented by them.
I personally don’t see how a smaller council is best practice, and I don’t really care what other communities have done. Newton is different and should never be afraid to go its own way.
On this issue, I want access to my representatives…individuals who have the time to take my call and discuss with me what’s working and what’s not, and who can then process this through our City government for positive change. My observation is that our councillors are flat out too busy today. Even if we shift some responsibilities to professional employees of the City who don’t now exist, I will never understand how a much smaller City Counsel will leave me better represented and served.
Just to add a counter, there are many thoughtful and involved Newton residents who never agreed with the League’s recommendations, and don’t feel represented by them.
I personally don’t see how a smaller council is best practice, and I don’t really care what other communities have done. Newton is different and should never be afraid to go its own way.
On this issue, I want access to my representatives…individuals who have the time to take my call and discuss with me what’s working and what’s not, and who can then process this through our City government for positive change. My observation is that our councillors are flat out too busy today. Even if we shift some responsibilities to professional employees of the City who don’t now exist, I will never understand how a much smaller City Counsel will leave me better represented and served.
Following on Michael’s comment, I suspect there are lots of folks who don’t even have the charter on their radar screen as an issue. Or don’t see the existing charter to be broken. Or worry that tinkering with the charter will make things worse.
I think a charter review is OK to do, it’s been 40+ years, but let’s not act like this is a crisis.
Following on Michael’s comment, I suspect there are lots of folks who don’t even have the charter on their radar screen as an issue. Or don’t see the existing charter to be broken. Or worry that tinkering with the charter will make things worse.
I think a charter review is OK to do, it’s been 40+ years, but let’s not act like this is a crisis.
We elected the charter commission to decide the best way to govern Newton., not to make everyone happy. I am sure the League’s unsurprising opinion will be treated like all the other information they gather and weigh it carefully.
I too think their biggest challenge is educating the voters, at least the ones who know and care enough to vote, about why any changes are needed, if that is what they decide. First, I think they will need to explain numerous times that Newton is one city; the villages are not small incorporated towns within its metro area. They should have representation individually but most City Councilors need to represent the city with the requirement that there is at least one who lives in each Ward to remain balanced. I think that is more important than the number of Councilors.
If the special permit granting authority stays with elected officials then the commission either needs to have some way to enforce the rules governing them or rewrite them completely. Presently, after receiving an application for a special permit, Councilors are to make their decision based on specific rules and not on what group is loudest or more influential.
We elected the charter commission to decide the best way to govern Newton., not to make everyone happy. I am sure the League’s unsurprising opinion will be treated like all the other information they gather and weigh it carefully.
I too think their biggest challenge is educating the voters, at least the ones who know and care enough to vote, about why any changes are needed, if that is what they decide. First, I think they will need to explain numerous times that Newton is one city; the villages are not small incorporated towns within its metro area. They should have representation individually but most City Councilors need to represent the city with the requirement that there is at least one who lives in each Ward to remain balanced. I think that is more important than the number of Councilors.
If the special permit granting authority stays with elected officials then the commission either needs to have some way to enforce the rules governing them or rewrite them completely. Presently, after receiving an application for a special permit, Councilors are to make their decision based on specific rules and not on what group is loudest or more influential.
@Marti: so would you prefer a move to a 13-ward system (one for each village) with 13 Councilors? Just curious….
@Marti: so would you prefer a move to a 13-ward system (one for each village) with 13 Councilors? Just curious….
What I don’t understand are the people that feel that 24 is a good number and 15 is too low. In an era where we have telephones, emails. etc. to communicate to people with than one person should be enough to communicate to a representative for. I am not advocating for 1 representative just making a point. I believe 1 per ward and some at large alderman is plenty. No need to have 3 per ward.
What I don’t understand are the people that feel that 24 is a good number and 15 is too low. In an era where we have telephones, emails. etc. to communicate to people with than one person should be enough to communicate to a representative for. I am not advocating for 1 representative just making a point. I believe 1 per ward and some at large alderman is plenty. No need to have 3 per ward.
Andreae, No.
Andreae, No.
@Tom – you might think so, but there have been Aldermen in the past who could not be bothered answering phone calls or emails (not saying Councilors since I don’t know how the current crop are).
@Tom – you might think so, but there have been Aldermen in the past who could not be bothered answering phone calls or emails (not saying Councilors since I don’t know how the current crop are).
I agree and understand that, we need to find those councilors and vote them out of office. It’s part of their job to help their constituents and if they aren’t communicating with the public they need to go (whether there are 24 councilors or 9).
I agree and understand that, we need to find those councilors and vote them out of office. It’s part of their job to help their constituents and if they aren’t communicating with the public they need to go (whether there are 24 councilors or 9).
It’s hard to vote out someone if they’re the only person on the ballot. One of the problems with the size of the CC is that it’s hard to find enough people to run – not everyone can manage an extra part-time job on top of their full-time one, or afford to only work part-time.
It’s hard to vote out someone if they’re the only person on the ballot. One of the problems with the size of the CC is that it’s hard to find enough people to run – not everyone can manage an extra part-time job on top of their full-time one, or afford to only work part-time.