Let there be no doubt. There is a real, significant choice for ward councilor in Ward 6. Not a believer? Watch the spirited 90-minute debate between incumbent Dick Blazar and challenger Brenda Noel. Heck, watch the first 10 minutes.
Dick established himself as the guy you want if you don’t want change. Over and over, at times getting quite testy, he made clear that he thinks that that neighbors and not developers should determine what gets built in a neighborhood. While he gave early lip service to listening to all and balancing competing interests, it was clear that he thinks his job is to side with neighbors to block or, at least constrain developers. He was dismissive of Smart Growth … because traffic. And, while he expressed great outrage at the allegation that he doesn’t support affordable or senior housing, he offered no plan, just critiques of 40B and of larger scale development as a mechanism to create more affordable housing. He’s supportive of the kind of affordable housing built in the 70s and 80s with state and federal funds, funds that are unlikely to become available in significant amounts in our lifetime.
When asked, Dick offered no explicit plan for Newton Centre. But, he really does have a plan. As he noted, the Newton Centre Task Force of a decade ago, split along no change, moderate change, more intensive change. (Full disclosure: I joined the Task Force on the more intensive change side.) And, because there was no consensus, Dick said, there was no progress. But, that’s a little disingenuous. Deadlock on the task force meant no change, which was — and continues to be — a victory for the no-change proponents.
For her part, Brenda established very quickly that she is up for a battle and she’s running for a reason. She was confident in her advocacy for Smart Growth, for affordable housing, and for modest density in village centers (though, when asked, she did not articulate specific places where density would be appropriate in Newton Centre). She clearly believes that change is coming to Newton, we need to accept that reality, and we need to be prepared to shape that change. Brenda repeatedly advocated for adopting best practices from elsewhere, although she added a cringeworthy need to “take a leap of faith” with a few. Brenda was far more optimistic about new development providing affordable housing opportunities.
Not surprisingly, the two took opposite sides on the charter. Not surprisingly, Dick’s a No. Brenda’s a Yes. Neither went beyond the now familiar arguments for either position.
Again, if you’re undecided (and live in Ward 6), you ought to watch the video. Greg has some links to highlights.
This is the most interesting race in this election, because it’s essentially a referendum on all the big issues.
Re. the “cringeworthy” statements: In a climate where everyone seems to think they know everything, it’s actually nice to see someone expressing trust in others’ judgement. She said that specifically about the charter committee, BTW.
Newtoner,
“Cringeworthy” because I think the positions she was advocating don’t require a leap of faith. The evidence is pretty good for both.
I would say that Ward 5 at-large and Ward 4 ward feature similar referenda on the big issues.
Riddle me this Mr. Roche – Why is Ms. Noel running for a Ward seat when she is pro-charter reform?
Because she can get in the club having only to run a ward wide race and the be positioned for an At Large seat if Yes wins IMHO.
Hi everyone,
I appreciate all the interest in the award 6 race. When I considered how I could make the most significant positive impact in my community I chose to challenge the current Ward 6 Councilor as we do not share the same values or vision for the future of the Ward. Should I be fortunate enough to gain the seat on November 7th I look forward to listening to and serving the Ward 6 community.
Seems a bit cynical to snag an opportunity for herself that she would deny everyone else in the future.
*ward- sorry typed on my cell phone
Holy political conundrum, Lucia!
If I were, speaking hypothetically, a ward 6 resident with a progressive bent, I would absolutely contest the ward seat, not the at-large seat. Dick is the least progressive of the three current Ward 6 councilors. I would have the most impact making his evenings available for other hobbies, rather than Vicki’s or Greg’s.
As I have said over and over, you run the race according to the rules at the time of the race. There are ward councilors. There is nothing hypocritical about running for ward councilor and at the same time wishing there were not ward councilors. While there are ward councilors, it would be best to have one in your ward who aligns with your other, non-charter policy preferences. That person may be you, yourself. Watch the video (though, I suspect you may have caught the show live). Brenda and Dick do not sip from the same policy fountain.
Is it hypocritical to vote for ward councilor if you vote yes on the charter?
As for the suggestion that it was easier for Brenda to go the ward councilor route, I think that if you’re going to unseat an incumbent, you’ve got an uphill battle against a very ward-centric ward councilor, like Dick. (As I remember, Dick beat George Mansfield by portraying him as out-of-touch with the ward.) Arguably, she would have had an easier time against Vicki or Greg. And, again, did you watch the debate? Brenda does not strike me as someone who shirks from a challenge.
Anyone who thinks it is easier to win a ward seat should spend a couple of days shadowing Brenda. Running for city council for the first time is a full-time job, no matter how the seat is elected. Even if you did nothing but walk around the ward and knock doors (and Brenda is doing way more than that), you’re looking at 6-8 months worth of canvassing on both weekend days.
@Amanda Heller…”snag an opportunity”? If “snag” means put in 30+ hours a week for 6 months, then I guess that is one way to look at it. To me it looks more like “work her tail off to try for an opportunity to serve Newton and bring change.”
As a Ward 6 resident who is actually supportive of growth, my concern Brenda, when I watched you in the debate, was your focused seemed much more city-centric and I was left thinking “oh okay this is what having a ward residency requirement, but an at large seat would look like if the Charter passes. I was hearing more about your vision city wide than in the ward. Which of course made sense when near the end of the debate you indicated eliminating the Ward Councilor role.
When you say that you don’t share a vision with Dick Blazer, I get that as your Vision is City-Wide and Dick’s is Ward-Centric. Ultimately, I think that is what Ward 6 will be voting on
I’m not sure where you perceive that your values diverge but that is always a slippery slope and vision is probably more relevant.
Even though I probably won’t be voting for you, thanks for running and good luck.
@Sean Roche – As I remember, Dick beat George Mansfield by portraying him as out-of-touch with the ward.
George was not just out of touch – he was known for never answering constituents’ calls or emails. I would have voted for a brick if it promised to respond when I had a concern.
@Amanda Heller This is not about the Charter. Vote yes or no. Have at it. And yes, I checked the No Website and understand how you will be voting but that is another topic. Not this one. On Nov 8th it will be decided one way or the other. Yes or No will win and we will move on.
What we want in Ward 6 is a councilor who is engaged and ready to lead. Dick is now playing to role of George Mansfield – Out of Touch with the Ward and with the City.
Take a look at the review from the Newton Tab
http://newton.wickedlocal.com/news/20171030/development-divide-ward-6-candidates-debate
The candidates could not be more different.
@Claire We want a councilor who understands both the Ward and the City. Blazar admits that he has no vision except to fossilize Newton in the past. – Review his voting record.
Here is the quote from the Tab
“I have no vision for the Centers”. And “I’m not someone who thinks the village centers are in terrible shape and need a lot of work. I like the village centers,” said Blazar.
99% of the residents of Newton Highlands and Newton Center would beg to differ with Dick. Walk around and you see a ton of Banks Hair and Nail Salons. Is that what you want? Again Dick is “Out of touch with Ward.”
There is a large group in this world who believe that the world is changing around us and the clear choice is Brenda Noel. What a joy would it be to have a Ward 6 councilor who not only cares deeply about the residents in the Highlands and Newton Center but also understands that we are a vibrant city. Yes, you can represent the needs of the Ward and be engaged with the City all at once. Brenda’s view, which you call “city wide” is exactly what we want to have as a councilor. Heck, all 24 councilors vote on the city projects so we want all 24 councilors up to speed on the city. We want a councilor to be engaged at the ward level and at the city level. To me, Brenda would be the ideal candidate for you. If you haven’t met her. Contact her. I bet she will have coffee with you.
For me it is being available, multiple ways of communication and full transparency. If you took a quick poll , a large portion of people would say that Vicki Danberg is their councilor for Ward 6. And I would bet most could not name all three of the Ward 6 councilors.
In terms of communication and taking the pulse of the residents. We want a communicator. We deserve someone who actually listens to the residents of the community and someone who can engage the community. Brenda has done a tremendous job getting her name out there.
During the debate Blazar stated he had no strategy to communicate in this digital age and went on to say that he really wasn’t too good with the Internet. In this day an age that is not good enough and unacceptable for a public servant. I want to hear form my city councilor in multiple ways and in the way I want to consume information. Brenda stated that every month she will send out a newsletter and hold office hours where residents can speak to her in addition to email, phone, Facebook and Twitter. Brenda Noel has stated her communication plan. Dick? Again no vision for this changing world we live in.
Ward 6 deserves a councilor who is active and engaged with the community and not fossilized in the past. Vote Brenda Noel the Clear Choice. – alex
There’s been a lot written on other threads in the past week about Dick Blazar being “ward centric” and “following the wishes of the ward.” The assumption being we all have the same views, concerns and issues we care about. For every person who feels Dick’s views resonate with them, there is surely an opposite number in the Ward who hold different views and believe he doesn’t speak for us or reflect our values. That’s what this election is about!
Both candidates are making their cases really well, in their own inimitable ways–the Highlands Area Council Debate in particular gave them a chance to demonstrate to us where they differ in policy and approach. But the argument that “the Ward” feels Dick “has our backs” or is more aligned with our interests assumes we all walk in lockstep. And all I have to do is look out my window at the wonderfully diverse collection of lawn signs in my corner of the Highlands alone–or chat with my neighbors–to know that’s not accurate.
Dick Blazar has my strong endorsement and I look forward to serving with him again next term. From the environment sustainability to fiscal responsibility to accessory apartments to village-scale development, Dick has been a strong ally on many critical issues facing Newton.
And I’m still not seeing the logic of running for a seat you want to eliminate.
@Councilor Norton: Councilor Blazar has said there’s “nothing smart about smart growth” is that your view too?
@Emily: Isn’t a pro-yes at-large candidate also running for a seat they want to eliminate? They would have a much harder time getting elected if the council is cut by half.
Oh course Emily you would not see the logic of supporting something that is eliminating your own job as your clear support for the No campaign shows. Why would people then think you would support downsizing the council in the future based on your current stances? Perhaps Brenda is looking beyond her own ambitions towards what might be a more effective form of government even if it means that her own potential position would no longer exist.
Greg I’ll put it this way – not everything CALLED smart growth is actually that.
For example giving away a public parking lot, and/or having the taxpayers subsidize private development projects, I don’t call that very smart – certainly not for those of us who are supposed to be guardians of other people’s money – money that they worked hard for and expect us to spend judiciously.
Thanks for your response Councilor Norton. Can you give us an example of a smart smart growth project, preferably in Newton but if not nearby that you hold up as an model? And where in Newton do you see the best opportunities for smart growth?
I appreciate your time responding with as many specifics as you can.
Emily,
I missed your Smart Growth follow up before I hit send on my other comment. You know perfectly well that Smart Growth refers to development that is environmentally sustainable, walkable, and creates a range of housing options. You and others may think it’s cute to substitute your definition for “smart” with the generally accepted definition, but that’s not the way good-faith exchanges go.
@Emily – We can argue over the definition of smart growth, sure. In the abstract though, I’ve heard you say you support it.
But Dick Blazar clearly says he doesn’t support smart growth at all. How can you strongly support him if he doesn’t believe in smart growth, or do you only care about preventing development?
Emily,
Going to keep saying this until I’m blue in the face (or, more likely, underwater due to climate change): you cannot be anti-density and pro-environmental sustainability. Density is not the only carbon-reducing tool in the municipal toolkit, but it’s one of them. And, it may be the most effective.
Dick bragged about reducing by half a development half-a-mile from one T stop and just under a mile from another. Also, literally next door to a grocery store, a big trip generator. Half-a-mile from the local elementary school.
Lauding anti-development types as pro-environmental sustainability is simply up-is-down-ism.
@Sean: You’re absolutely right, and this is why I’m having a really hard time deciding about two at-large candidates with a great environmental track record who are also fiercely anti-development.
Newtoner,
Brian Yates and who else?
No matter what happens to the Charter vote on Tuesday the 24 member city council we will elect will serve their full two year term.
Brenda deserves credit for focusing on the term she’s applying for, rather than 2019. Councilor Norton seems to be fighting to keep her seat for life. Brenda just wants to do the job now.
@Sean: So you’re ok with the City giving away public land. Because I’m not.
Here’s an example of a project that would have made sense: The Metro West project proposed for Austin St. 100% affordable, 25 units, 3 stories, looked like townhouses, within the 18-30 units laid out in the RFP. The only proposal that actually tried to complement what is already there. Yet that project didn’t even make it past the first round of cuts. Why? Of course I have my theories.
Emily,
Yeah, I’m much happier with more than double the number of units, double the number of people who can live that much less car-dependent. You and I just have different priorities. That’s fine. I want to do all we can to reduce climate change.
And, yes. I would be happy with the same density in Newton Centre, my home village, or up the street from my house, or on my block.
@Sean – I am pretty confident most voters in Newton do not support giveaways of public land.
Another project I would have supported, if given the opportunity – Engine 6. In fact a resident on Court St asked me if they could have Engine 6 instead of the 40B that ended up there.
My home ward is 6 and I will be enthusiastically voting for Brenda. She’s amazing. Totally cool person, a newcomer to politics who is running an incredible campaign and right on issues that (for me personally) are priorities. Go Brenda!
Emily,
Here’s the measure of much voters care about the giveaway of public land: not a single incumbent is being challenged because of her support for Austin St. Not. A. One.
The issue is density. Density is a tool municipalities can use to reduce climate change. Climate change is the most urgent issue facing Newton. If an elected official is not in favor of density, she has not sufficiently grasped the urgency of climate change.
There are other relevant concerns. Neighborhood character. Traffic. Affordable housing. Responsible disposition of city property.
Except for affordable housing, their urgency pales in comparison to climate change. Fortunately, density can also be a tool to address the need for affordable housing. Win win.
This is not a merely political issue. This is not a matter on which reasonable people can disagree. Global climate change is a moral issue and its cause and impact are indisputable.