Candidate Ruthanne Fuller has just released this statement in response to an ad in today’s Newton TAB.
My opponent’s recent ad questioning my capacity to be both a mother and a leader shows a regrettable lack of understanding for those of us who work every day to balance family, career, and service to the community and for women who work – whether in paid or unpaid positions – and raise kids.
Last year, I declared my candidacy for Mayor of Newton because I am passionate about Newton’s future. I have a clear vision, a plan to make us an even better community, and the experience to deliver. My campaign has been and will continue to be about the issues that matter to Newtonians and my vision for Newton’s future. To hear firsthand the hopes and concerns of our residents, I’ve been to each of our 32 precincts multiple times talking to Newtonians at their doors and meeting in living rooms all across the city.
Being an effective Mayor of Newton is all about leadership, character, and values. Leadership is about laying out a bold and achievable vision and a roadmap that improves the quality of life for all of Newton’s residents:
• Making sure our schools are the best in Massachusetts. • Ensuring the strongest financial outlook for Newton. • Building more affordable, livable neighborhoods and vibrant, walkable village centers. • Leading on making us a greener, more sustainable city. • Committing to be a diverse, inclusive, and affordable place to live.
What leadership is not about is hurling political attacks in the last two weeks of the campaign suggesting a woman’s experience counts for less than a man’s. That’s not going to help move Newton forward.
Sadly, my opponent has decided to undervalue my thirty years of experience. He spent thousands of dollars on a full page ad in the Newton Tab that disparages me for ‘only’ living here close to 25 years. Notably, this would exclude many people of color who have moved here in the last few decades. Equally disappointing, he suggests I am less qualified to be Mayor because, like many other women, I’ve had a mix of full-time, part-time and unpaid work experience, all while raising my three children.
After graduating from Harvard Business School, I’ve played a leadership role for 30 years while at the same time bringing up three great kids in this wonderful community. I have worked in the business world, in the non-profit sector (including 8 years developing and implementing the first-ever strategic plan for WGBH- Channel 2), as a citizen activist, and as a city councilor for eight years.
For decades I have been a leader. I tackle complex challenges; I build consensus; I get the work done. That’s the leadership Newton’s residents can expect from me as their Mayor.
RELATED:
Wow. What Scott said was that he worked full-time. Period. How on earth do you go from there to this?
To Scott’s point: Being Mayor is*more* than a full-time job. So as we consider who is best suited for the role, being able to demonstrate that you can and have juggle the myriad demands of this role is important. Scott has a.) worked full-time; b.) served as Board president; c.) served as Ward 1 at-large councilor; and d.) ran for Mayor of Newton, while e.) helping to raise a young daughter, who f.) is of school age.
It’s speaks to his ability to do the job. Sad to see this press release. Not exactly an uplifting, unifying message.
Again, the same vague language about professional experience. Is it so difficult to list those positions / activities in chronological order, whether or not they were paid positions or were full- or part-time? This was THE opportunity to put this issue to rest. Disappointing.
I can only imagine myself applying for a job with this level of detail about my experience… don’t think it would end well.
No Mr. Brandel, it is sad and disappointing that you have taken such a partisan approach to addressing the issue. It is precisely because of statements such as yours and Mr. Lennon’s (both the words themselves as well as the implications) that Ms. Fuller had to respond as she did.
Again with the mysterious “over 30 years of experience.”
I am disappointed and dismayed to read this. It’s a shame that in the last 13 days before the election, words are twisted.
Ruthanne’s press release states: “My opponent’s recent ad questioning my capacity to be both a mother and a leader…” Where does Scott question your capacity to be both a mother and a leader? That is not written anywhere in the page.
I agree 100% with this statement in Ruthanne’s press release: “Being an effective Mayor of Newton is all about leadership, character, and values.” Yes it is, and Scott is that package. Let’s move past this jumping on a sentence that doesn’t attack women, or attack mothers and leaders.
Not the press release I would have written. But, Ruthanne has much the better of this issue. Scott has dug himself an unnecessary hole.
But, it has finally dawned on me why Ruthanne has had such a difficult time describing her experience. I blame HBS.
Ok folks here we go again.
Here is the link of Ruthanne’s experience.
It starts in 1979 after graduation from college with her first job and ends in 2017 as a City Councilor. I count 38 years of experience. From profit to non profit businesses, to community civic volunteer experience to being elected to the Newton City Council.
https://ruthannefuller.com/ruthannes-experience/
Now back to my ‘homemaker’ status preparing dinner and having that glass of wine
@Sean, Scott may have potentially dug a hole with some voters, but then Ruthanne completely threw him a life line with that press release. “My opponent’s recent ad questioning my capacity to be both a mother and a leader” REALLY??
I wish we could turn the clock back a day on this race, but it is what it is.
As one who has attended many meet n greets for both candidates, in keeping with the belief that both candidates are qualified for the office, I find this as so-so. SL has been saying this for months in his stump, and now it becomes an issue?
This is a distraction from the charter issue draw; he got a rip for his Angier 8/8 option answer, and is now told to go to his corner for a time-out..
Jo-Louise – You got that right. What a bunch of nonsense to fight over at this late stage of the race.
The issue is authenticity, integrity and depth of experience and knowledge of Newton city matters. Scott has my support.
Vague, denigrating and annoying. I find myself annoyed whenever I hear whatever RuthAnne has to say?
A few short weeks ago I was very excited about this mayor’s race. We had three strong candidates, all of whom looked like they would make a terrific mayor. In recent days it’s become increasingly clear to me, the best candidate was knocked out in the Preliminary Election.
Each candidate is loosening their footing, guess they got bored of civil debates.
RAF- Be authentic. Be transparent. Be enthusiastic. Be yourself. I wish I had written you this advice many moons ago.
SL- Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Consider highlighting your own positive attributes before throwing down the gauntlet and letting the cyber world have a feast with your words and giving your opponent a home run (even if they swung and missed the opportunity).
Watching the cookie crumble here…
I believe that truly progressive feminists in Newton will not fall for Ruthanne and her underwhelming qualifications and the irrelevant retorts here . Her effort to look like a progressive feminist doesn’t work for me. She does not value or understand the needs of working families, including city employees. She has given considerable money to Republican causes and candidates for years. Like many other women in Newton, I know well what it means to work fulltime and raise children and to think carefully about election rhetoric…which is exactly why I am supporting Scott Lennon.
@Sally
I agree with your comments regarding Ruthanne and her past support of Republican causes. I also am concerned with her inability to relate to the diversity of the city of Newton.
I see Scott as a strong candidate because he has earned the support of unions and local organizations. I am concerned though that his approach will slide over time and that he could lose his authenticity. I see him as someone committed to the community. But I’ve been curious how he might be both the politician he strives to be and also be the community oriented citizen he promotes. This ad is the convergence of these two aspects I’ve been thinking about. The message regarding his experience could have been worded and promoted in a way that focused on his successes, such as giving examples of projects he’s been involved with, some well known and maybe some well less known. But, instead, I interpret the ad as a representation of his disconnect from the current political climate and the disregard to the priorities and awareness that much of his voting audience hold as high priorities. Thinking through the ramifications of a publication such as this I would have thought might deter him and his campaign from publishing it, but, there it was in the TAB. I think he has high hopes, a grounded intention, and many, many, many, citizens that support him. What I hope happens is that he deeply reflects on the implications that this had and that he explicitly acknowledges how the ad could have been written differently OR if he does believe in what that ad says that he thoroughly restates the message. Because right now I’m frustrated and expect better.
Scott Lennon didn’t respect the citizens during the impeachment hearing and he didn’t respect his opponent or women or people of Newton who make different choices than his with his ad in the TAB today. We have enough people who want to shut down conversation, are disrespectful and go low in public office right now. BTW, President Obama’s and President Clinton’s daughters all went to private school should that have excluded them from the White House?
@Waban Mom can you expand on the implication regarding previous presidents, daughters, private school attendance, and the relevance it has to the current election in Newton? Thanks.
@Curious, the ad states that “I am the only candidate who went to Newton Public School and who is sending my child to the schools.” SL and his surrogates have criticized Ruthanne for sending her kids to private school on many occasions. The suggestion is that because her kids didn’t go to Newton schools she isn’t a legitimate or worthy candidate. By that same logic, the POTUS children go to private school and does that mean they shouldn’t hold the office. It is no one’s business. Lennon should respect the choices families’ make.
Ruthanne Fuller has made a pretty stunning (and I think off the mark) accusation of Scott Lennon leading to accusations that he is a doesn’t value women. Seems strange to me that the 9 current women council people (including Ruthanne) would unanimously elect him President is he disrespects and doesn’t value women.
Personally, I’d like to hear from the other 8 women on the CC if they think Ruthanne’s accusation that Lennon disrespects and doesn’t value women has merit.
Claire:
I’m pretty sure this was not the response Scott was hoping for when he posted that ad. At best it is a self-inflicted, tone-deaf wound. Especially since I believe he has had the wind at his back for some time now.
But posting that Ruthanne is accusing Lennon of disrespecting and doesn’t value women isn’t helpful for your candidate either. I’m sure Ruthanne have the ability to be righteously indignant makes your blood boil, especially since these are the issues you’ve been posting about to this forum for a few weeks now.
But her statement doesn’t attempt to make universal her complaints. Meaning she isn’t saying that Scott doesn’t value women, she was specific about him not valuing her experience. It is certainly easier to argue the universal (Does anyone believe Scott doesn’t value all women or disrespects all women?, of course not, so Ruthanne must be wrong), but much harder to argue the specific, especially since the ad is right in front of us.
Most of the time, issues like this are the proverbial red mean for politicial campaigns, and each campaign’s true believers will see this via the rose-colored glasses of their particular candidate. But as someone who is a bit neutral here, I don’t think this makes Scott into something he is not, and I don’t think it was a good look for him. Both things are possible. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t a mistake and poorly written. Because it was.
I’m not sure if I’m playing devil’s advocate or beating a dead horse on this one, but I want to air it out.
I understand the message it sends when the POTUS chooses to send their child(ren) to private school. That they aren’t invested in the public school system. Yes? The immediate ideas that come to mind, as political figures I could understand making the choice to send children to public school because then the children and parents both have an authentic experience in the public schools. On the other hand, the relevant details to having a well-known figures children in the public school I can imagine could be quite the burden. Yes, I realize there are 100 ways to work around this, but, it is something I tend to think of.
What I tend to think of in the Newton case is that we as a city are proud, so proud, of our education system. No? We are always striving to make it better and are innately aware of the privilege our school system offers.
I also understand that every learner is different and learning environments are crucial for the success of our students.
My thinking is if you’re running for political office your life will become less private. The choice you made to send your kids to another school is a topic you could really make into a positive perspective. Example statement ” My child succeeds more in smaller classroom sizes and the public school is a great environment but it wasn’t right for my child BUT I am an advocate for inclusion and supporting all students so learning from my child I became more involved in the local schools and worked toward making it a more inclusive environment where all children succeed.”
It may not make sense to go to another school, it may not make sense to become involved in the schools. But if you’re a public figure with an interest in becoming more involved in the community your intentions, reasoning, and support for topics need to be thorough and intentional.
It is clear that the choice to have her children go to a private school and associated costs are sticking points for many in this thread. I would see that as an opportunity for her to expand on it and be a champion for her choices. But it’s been many months of this topic resurfacing and a haven’t noticed a particular change or acknowledgment of the topic.
I could also see it as a place for her discuss how her privilege to live a higher class life may have obstructed her ability to relate on a personal level to some of the struggles the citizens of Newton face. Being honest, authentic, and setting an outline for how she DOES RELATE and how she is involved in the community while acknowledging her disconnect could have given her an opportunity to build a rapport with a larger percentage of the Newton community.
Excellent points Curious. Of course a President doesn’t have any input on a local school district.
I agree, I would need RAF to acknowledge that her wealth and privelge means she need to go the extra mile to demonstrate that she gets the challenged of working class and middle income Newtonians.
I was flummoxed during last Sunday’s debate when a question came up about adding some sort of fee on home sales to fund affordable housing. And Ruthanne correctly pointed out that could be onerous on homeowners whose home is their primary if not exclusive source of a nest egg. So far so good EXCEPT she then said something like 70% of US (Newton homeowners) depend upon our home as our primary retirement funds. Really? She had made and almost $7 million dollar profit on the home she sold in 2014 and she is saying “US”
I’ve been looking for the video and/or transcript of the debate to come available so I could be very precise because frankly I was shocked that she included herself in 70% and felt that was at best disconnected and at worst disingenuous.
As soon as that debate video or transcript comes online I will share.
Like Trump, Ruthanne takes a sentence out of its context, twists it and delivers fake outrage in response. Claiming 30 years of experience as a Strategic Planner opens the question; what plans were ever implemented? Did they succeed or were they stuffed in a file somewhere? We don’t know. I might have phrased this differently, but if you know Scott (as thousands in Newton do) you know Ruthanne has deliberately misread his statement and twisted its meaning. Not a surprise, but still a distraction. Scott is authentic, committed to all of Newton and trusted as a leader. He’ll be a great Mayor
Having one government job for a long time isn’t exactly an ace in the pocket. I thought we were all so upset because our city leaders have for years now had no vision, because the budget has been allowed to balloon generations (which is only now because Mayor Warren shook Newton and woke it up) without insisting on it being fiscally responsible, and so on. And that goes for the schools too. What’s the big deal that Mr. Lennon has been a budget director w/ the Sheriff’s office, and also has been elected Pres of City Council numerous times? We all know that’s the problem with governments, right down to municipal governments AND school districts, and that corporations – where people can much more easily be hired and then fired for incompetence if necessary – have to have more fiscal responsibility.
What Mike Striar said.
The best candidate lost in the preliminary.
@Paul and Mike: I’m sure Eli Katzoff will be tickled read that! 😉
Ruthanne is incorrect. I don’t think anyone was attacking her capacity as a mother and leader. There was confusion about what she has actually done against what was on income tax filing forms. A reasonable question but I believe Gloria Gavris set that record straight.
I’ve thrown my hat in with Scott for a number of reasons, but appreciate the work Ruthanne has done for Newton.
@Claire- I appreciated reading your input regarding the debate. The example you used regarding her inferring that she considers herself a part of the 70% seems out of touch. It sounds like she isn’t self aware enough to realize that the profit she made off of her property sale excludes her from being able to generalize and group herself with others. This has me flummoxed. I think this is something she could revisit because without a telescope in on the issue I could see how she would easily pass it off and disregard the inference it has.
I agree that the reference here is disingenuous and disconnected.
Based off of the sale of that house I am assuming too much… I wonder how living in an atmosphere such as that might pose an opportunity for her to acknowledge that the wealth she is surrounded by isn’t that of many Newton citizens. Basically, is she able to genuinely engage with community members that live different lifestyles?
Is there a space where she acknowledges the real estate she lives in?
@Curious “Is there a space where she acknowledges the real estate she lives in?” Not that I have seen and I have held off sharing my reaction to that exchange until I can reference a video or transcript of that exchange but I am confident I got it essentially correct
Point of fact: Wicked Local used quotes in their headline, but those exact words cannot be directly attributed to Councilor Fuller. They’re paraphrasing. Her response did not use the word “attack” with an active voice. That changes the tone. The response was a bit more nuanced than that.
I find it disingenuous to suggest the bullet points in the ad are anything but political attacks. The differences highlight charges most frequently used to discredit Fuller.
Actually Adam that quote is directly quoting the headline on Fuller’s statement that was sent to Village 14 and presumably to the TAB too. “Attacking” was Fuller’s word choice.
Orly? Thanks for correcting me on that.
To tell the truth, I’m a bit insulted that Ruthanne would think we are all such dimwits that we would buy into her “attacked” drivel. She is a strong woman; to make herself to be a VICTIM is not a signal that she will be a strong leader, quite the opposite.
It seems that the Fuller campaign sensed it had lost momentum and potentially the race, thus this desperate attempt to make an issue where there is none. Fuller was never in my top 2; I was a Sangiolo supporter early on because she was genuine and intelligent. I will continue to support her and Lennon.