Congratulations to Newton City Councilor Emily Norton who has been named Executive Director of the Charles River Watershed Association, succeeding longtime CRWA Executive Director Bob Zimmerman.
Norton is currently director of the Massachusetts Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Hooray for Emily!
Congrats Emily!
A fine choice indeed. Congratulations!
I can’t think of anybody that would be better for this position. I’m just hoping that Emily reminds everyone about the important role that the Federal Clean Water Act, the EPA and various NGOs and state agencies played in the clean up progress on the River to date. I sail in Charlestown with a number of racers. with vastly different political persuasions. Some of the more conservative regularly grouse about supposed over regulation by government agencies. On the other are quick to express gratitude that the Harbor is so much cleaner today than it was before the cleanup got underway. I can tell them as strongly as possible that government is the main reason the Harbor and Charles River are so much cleaner, but it never really seems to register with some of them. Maybe they think this was all done through bake sales. I don’t know.
Good for you Emily.
Congrats!
Bob Zimmerman is a great guy and a true gentleman with excellent interpersonal skills that he relied upon to bring a multitude of the disparate Charles River communities together over the years, resulting in many significant Watershed improvements. The strong attributes that he brought to the job will unquestionably be missed, especially since Emily Norton is known not for bringing people together but rather for her divisiveness. Will this job provide enough of a conflict of interest that Norton will have to resign from the City Council? I certainly hope so. What a terrific outcome that would be!
Gerry Chervinsky is right when he writes that Councilor Norton is divisive. (And I write this as someone who is also divisive.) She successfully led the opposition to the charter, which was certainly most divisive political campaign in Newton in many years. She’s also the city councilor most associated with the no-growth side of Newton’s very divisive housing debate.
But Gerry is wrong to suggest that her new job should have to lead to her resignation from the council. I actually believe Norton’s leadership of the Sierra Club was more problematic because Sierra Club as has a multi-issue environmental agenda (and I struggled to understand how the state Sierra Club director could be against smart growth). The Charles River Watershed’s focus is narrower. It should be easy for her to recuse herself on an occasional vote that might be a conflict.
This seems like a good fit and we all know it’s an important job. Great hire.
Gerry,
You are unfair to Emily. She has worked very hard to improve
life in Newton for all her constituents on many different issues.
She will provide good leadership in her new role. The Charles River will be in good hands.
People like Emily ought to be encouraged to continue their
valuable public service for the better good of the community.
If you personally object to Emily please remember many more
benefit from those that give of themselves for public good.
I’m breaking my vow to not participate in v14 to ask: could @Gerry be more of a dickhead?
That’s Gerry with a ‘G’
Congratulations Emily! Sounds like a great job.
I don’t know what bothers me more: Gerry Chervinsky’s comment (I’m sure Councilor Norton would “consider the source”) or the eight people who liked it.
A great choice for the job! A true environmentalist who’s skeptical about the shibboleths that have misled some people.
I look forward to working with her on protecting and improving the Hemlock Gorge section of the River and the adjoining areas.
Brian Yates
Founding President
Friends of Hemlock Gorge
Greg, there’s smart growth and there’s SmartGrowth(tm), a buzzword that can be abused and often is. Emily has been very good at defending the interests of her ward and of the city’s residents in general, which do not necessarily align with the developers who want to make money fast here. There are ways to do smart growth that do not look a bit like the vanilla suburban lifestyle starter sets that the developers keep trying to cram down our throats.
For a city that is ringed by the Charles River, I’d struggle to even imagine how the role of Newton City Councilor would conflict with the Charles River Watershed Association. Yes, I’m sure it’s conceivable in theory but in general this appointment is good for both the City of Newton and the Charles River Watershed Association.
I don’t disagree with Greg that Emily has occasionally been divisive on the generally divisive issue of development, as Greg has occasionally has been as well.
The river on the other hand is a very unifying issue in the City. There are people who are incredibly focused on improving the Charles River and plenty of people that its not on their radar, but as far as I can see there is no substantial opposition – no organized group who’s pushing back – no group organizing to allow more dumping into the river. No group saying that the bowling ball factory in Upper Falls should be able to dye the river blue on Tuesdays when they make blue balls, as they did a generation ago,
I think the Newton City Council and the Charles River Watershed Association are in harmony and that Emily Norton is a great choice for both.
At the Sierra Club, where I’ve volunteered on the Executive Committee, Emily was laser-focused, and seemingly indefatigable, on moving the Commonwealth forward on clean energy (renewable energy legislation, electrification of vehicles and transit), fixing gas leaks, stopping egregious new fossil fuel infrastructure and getting us near a tipping point where plastic bag pollution may soon be banned state-wide. Perhaps most effective is Emily’s grassroots activist training across cities and towns, where her message of environmental social justice resonates across the political spectrum. While I have a different perspective on certain aspects of local development, I consider Emily to be a powerful voice for people and our planet. The CRWA, and Newton – with perhaps as long a Charles River border as any town – is extremely fortunate to have Emily as Director.
“Divisive” is an odd term. It is a term that someone in the Newton political elite will use. I have said it before and I will say it again, Emily is a populist. She is a liberal populist, but she is a populist. For better or worse, she organized people to scuttle the charter reform. If she really was divisive, she would have failed. She was inclusive enough to organize. I view Marc Laredo and Emily as opposites, but they worked together on this one. I would not call that derisive.
She has been and will be a big leader in communication. Back in the old days she start the Newton Public Schools blog. She started the idea of “office hours” and sending emails about Newton news. Others have copied her, and that is a good thing.
@Jeffery: Politically speaking the “no” charter campaign was brilliant. Election strategy at its finest. Councilor Norton defined the issue (as a treat to democracy) before the yes side even began organizing. It worked and Norton deserves credit for that. But it was divisive and left a lot of folks with lot of hard feelings. I expect Norton will bring the same political savvy to the Charles River Watershed.
@Greg: Isn’t it the issue that was divisive rather than the person championing its defeat? Would you call the people leading the yes side divisive as well?
The strategy was divisive. The messaging implied that the charter commission was undermining democracy. (Norton wrote a blog post headlined “Charter Commission votes to eliminate me.” The website’s URL was NewtonDemocracy.org )
Now we all know the proposed charter would not have ended democracy or eliminated Emily Norton. It would have just changed the way we (still democratically) elected our council. It would have eliminated ward councilors two elections down the road, not a specific individual. As with every other American elected official, Norton did not “own” her seat, she occupied it. Nothing would have prevented her from running at large.
Now, I don’t really want to go down the road of re litigating the charter. I’m only saying it was a brilliant, successful, savvy but divisive strategy.
Yes others were divisive too. Myself included. But “others” aren’t the ones were discussing because they just took a new job.
Kudos, Emily! I hope the Quinobequin Jungle—um, Parkland, will now get some well deserved attention!
@Sallee Lipshutz: Yes, it would be nice not to share a narrow road with cars. Quinobequin Road is such a missed opportunity.
Greg.
I think you mean that Councillor Norton defined the Charter as a”threat to democracy”, not a “treat to democracy”. The fact the majority of voters disapproved of the Charter indicates that most people agreed with that characterization. Endlessly re-fighting the last election is really divisive
I’m glad that Jeffrey Pontiff labeled her as a populist. That term has been hijacked by the current President. Fred Harris defined the term populism in his 1976 Presidential Campaign as the belief that “Too few people have too much wealth and power, and the rest of us have too little of either.” I hope there will be a true populist candidate for President in 2020 and many true populists in the 2018 elections.
@Brian: I’m not trying to re-fight the last election, I’m complimenting her for winning it (and on her new job).
Ah Brian. Wasn’t the Fred Harris campaign grand.
@Bob: I was a big admirer of the “Yes for Yates” campaign from three years ago.
This is why we can’t have nice things people.
A few points:
1) Congrats to Emily on her new job. This seems like a great fit and I know it is a great cause. I hope both Emily and CRWA are tremendously successful in this new partnership.
2) It is always fair game to fair criticize our public officials for their acts taken/not taken in their public jobs. But on something like this, which is basically a job announcement, my personal preference would be to just congratulate Emily and leave it at that. There are plenty of posts where we can comment on city council politics and the charter. Can we all just leave it at that and not churn up the charter/development? Even if it is just discussion points, start a new post.
3) With that said, even if I disagreed with the forum/timing, Gerry also has the right to post his opinions without being cursed at by Denis. (With that said, welcome back to the blog Denis! I’ve missed your charm and wit 😉 )
Emily, I want to be able to swim in the river with my kids. And eat the fish (if I can actually catch the fish). Now that would be an accomplishment!
@Greg. We were so much younger then.
Congratulations to Emily for accepting the ED position at the Charles River Watershed Assoc. Joining the Board of Alderman (Now Council) together in 2014, I have seen Emily’s effectiveness in action.
She would have been my first choice for the job, and its a credit to the CRWA that they landed someone, not just with enormous talents, but with the fire to get the job done.
She will be a force to protect the river, and people will soon learn river protection is at a new level: Don’t mess with the Charles!!