Newton resident and a long time Village 14 blogger Bryan Barash has formally announced plans to challenge incumbent Emily Norton for the Ward 2 City Council contest in November of 2019. (Note: Although this is mentioned in a different thread, we traditionally post campaign announcements as a new thread.)
Here’s his campaign website and announcement
My name is Bryan Barash and I am running to be your local Ward 2 City Councilor.
At a time when so much of our politics is divisive, we need to come together as a community to meet the needs of our neighborhood and our city. As your city councilor I will utilize my decade of public policy expertise, combined with my intimate knowledge of both state and local government, to ensure your concerns are heard and your needs are met at City Hall.
I believe strongly in the power of kindness, the impact of compromise, and the decency of the people who live here. I am guided by my progressive values and driven by a desire to give back to this community which has given me so much.
In announcing my candidacy, I commit to running a clean, positive, grassroots campaign. To that end, and because I am so concerned about the pernicious influence of money in politics at all levels, I am refusing contributions to my campaign from municipal lobbyists and developers.
Over the days and months ahead, I plan to lay out an ambitious platform to move Newton forward. Most of all, I want to hear what’s on your mind. I plan to spend the next year talking with every single person in our community, to find out what you’re hearing, what you’re excited about, what you’re worried about, and what I can do to improve your life and our community.
Together, I know we can do great things for this city that we love and call home. I am looking forward to talking with you soon, and will work hard to earn your vote in November 2019
Sincerely,
Bryan Barash
Just want to say thank you to everyone at Village14 for being such a great (virtual) community. This blog serves a vital community need, and while I’m incredibly excited to be running to represent my neighborhood, I’m sad to be giving up my role with V14 helping keep Newton up to date on state and local issues they might be interested in.
Bryan campaigned to eliminate the ward councilors. He believes in large scale housing development in our village. He would not be a good candidate for Ward 2 if his only goal is to push more housing on Washington St.
Redevelopment, which includes housing, will continue to happen on Washington Street, and all of Newton, forever. Would you prefer elected officials who help shape it to benefit the community, or those that would fight it while it happens anyways? Congrats Bryan!
What Colleen said; 10 times over!
Colleen,
There is nothing wrong with encouraging more housing development if there is a need. Eg to increase tax base, attract employers to the area. But i ‘think’ bryans focus is housing for social justice reasons which I believe is not in the long term interest of the ‘majority’ Newton residents.
In fact, this blog is probably not the best forum to look for varied opinions, its mostly a far left echo chamber
Bugek,
I disagree with your assessment of this blog being a left left echo chamber. Heck Greg leads the Newton Needham Chamber of Commerce and C of C’s are notoriously not left leaning.
There are a lot of pro-Ruthanne Fuller commenters on this blog and she could hardly be characterized as far left leaning.
There is another discussion of Bryan’s running against Emily Norton for Ward 2 City Councilor on which I have already commented.
Colleen, Bryan named several issues he will be campaigning on in this election. I don’t know that he is for the kind of large scale type you describe. I know your main concern is any development on Washington Street but Emily’s way of attempting to stop it all hasn’t worked out well. We have 2 five story ones going up now. A better way would be to pick a few specifics about a proposal, perhaps height, density, affordable units and design, to fight for and argue over civilly, sticking to the facts. No gross hyperbole, demonizing or conspiracy theories.
I would like to have a ward councilor who listens to the entire community and relays all of their views to the larger council, but can think for him/herself and will engage actively in a larger discussion about the issues facing the city as a whole.
Good luck! This is bound to be an interesting election, with two outstanding candidates. I see eye to eye with councilor Norton on some issues – environment, transit, recreational marijuana – but frequently disagree with her on development projects. Looking forward to hear what Bryan has to say on all those issues.
I am very excited that we are going to have a race in Ward 2. Bryan will be an excellent candidate!
Candidate Barash lives next door, so I know who he is. He seems like a nice young man. I have some questions he may be able to answer.
1. What has Councilor Norton done wrong that we should vote against her?
2. Have you changed your mind about eliminating the position of Ward Councilor in Newton?
3. What is your position on building 4 and 5 story buildings on Washington Street?
4. Do you support or oppose the Ward 2 Councilor that maintains Councilors, once elected, should vote as they like and if Constituents don’t like such votes they should not return them to office?
Peter, your first 3 questions are good ones, I’m sure they would be answered in any campaign. I’m a bit baffled by your last one. You might want to rephrase or correct.
I’ll note that it would be unlikely that any councilor could vote with the majority of their ward all of the time. Emily certainly hasn’t, nor would I expect her to. Are you concerned that Bryan will act more like a city-wide councilor and not take care of the ward somehow?
No snark, just trying to understand your question.
Also, while I’m excited for the race, it is a long way away, so we don’t have to make this into an instant debate.
Have a great weekend.
Peter – I welcome the opportunity to choose between two candidates, it makes for a healthy election – or actually it gives us a chance to actually have an election. Voting for or against someone without an opponent doesn’t really do much for me. Why is this a bad thing?
Congratulations Bryan-
You usually have some well thought out comments and observations on most topics on Village 14, so I found it odd that you have posted nothing on the threads concerning Bill Humphrey, vis a vis his tweets about the Mashpee police chase.
You are featured predominantly in a photo on Bill’s website
as a supporter of his, (along with councilor Susan Albright), Can you please share how you feel about that episode and
whether you are concerned about supporting Bill in light of the fallout from that episode?
As a “progressive” and supporter of Bill Humphrey, do you share his belief that income redistribution should be a the primary component in addressing the issue of income inequality in the city of Newton?
Thanks for your reply and good luck!
Hi all! Sorry for the delayed response to some of your questions, it’s been a bit of a whirlwind 24 hours since announcing. Really appreciate everyone who has reached out to share your support, thoughts, and questions.
OK, to answer your questions…
@Colleen & Ann – Absolutely a fair question about the Charter. The voters decided they prefer the current system and I respect the will of the voters to determine the government that works best for them. I want to continue to serve my community, and running for this seat at this time is the best way for me to do that.
@Peter – Thanks, it’s been great getting to know you “over the fence” so to speak. Happy to answer your questions:
1 – I’m focused on why voters should elect me to represent them on the City Council. I’ll leave it to my opponent to make the case to voters that she deserves to be returned to office. The bedrock of our democratic system is that voters make the choice, and I’m looking forward to meeting as many of them as I possibly can.
2 – See above response to Ann and Colleen.
3 – My position on development and planning is that we should have a community centered process to determine what kind of building, streetscapes, amenities, and city services we want in our village centers. I believe strongly that the sooner we take control of our future, the better. Evaluating individual projects on an ad hoc basis is a bad way to do community planning. That being said, in the interim, I believe all planning decisions should be evaluated on their own merits.
4 – I think I get where you’re going with this, but let me know if this isn’t exactly answering your question. I want to hear from you and if elected I will always give you the reasons for my votes. I know from my work in the legislature that one of the hardest roles as a lawmaker is finding the right balance between your best judgment and the views of your community. I will work hard each and every day to achieve that balance to the best of my ability.
@Paul – Thanks, appreciate the kind words! Regarding Bill, he’s been a good friend and there’s a lot we agree on. I’ll leave it to Bill to answer questions about his tweet though. I’m focused on running my race and issues facing the city of Newton.
Regarding income inequality, I think it is one of the most pressing issues of our time. While we have limited ability to address systemic issues with our economy at the local level, I’m interested in ideas about how to support people in Newton who might be struggling. If you have any thoughts on what we could be doing, I’d be very interested in hearing them. Lets grab coffee sometime?
Bryan, a follow-up. You had the opportunity to run either in an at-large race or in a ward race. You picked ward. Why?
Hi Jeff – I believe this is how I can best serve the ward. I’m a huge fan of Susan Albright and although we don’t always agree, I’ve been impressed by Jake Auchincloss’s work and accessibility as a councilor so far.
Mostly boilerplate answers with little meat on the bone so far Bryan.
Bill quickly learned that all of his social media posts counted whether he wants them to or not. All candidates are judged not only on their own opinions and proposals, but on who they do, or do not choose to associate themselves with. You are a supporter of Bill Humphrey, and as he is, a “progressive”. The questions won’t get any easier and they definitely won’t go away. I’ll give you a pass on the first question because the Mashpee mess belongs to Bill, not you.
You have identified yourself as has Bill, as a “progressive”, you are a supporter of his, do you or do you not agree with Bill that income inequality in Newton should be dealt with by income redistribution? It should be an easy question for you to answer because it should be one of the foundational underpinnings of your political beliefs….. If you need to consult with one of the Newton Democratic City Committee folks or your campaign people to come up with a nuanced answer please do.
Thanks again
Thanks Bryan
You were replying to me while I was chewing on your leg like a bone.
My sincere apologies. Thank you for taking the time to answer
Coffee is on me. Yes I will try to think of something constructive, not destructive.
No worries Paul! I tried to answer them one by one and not just write one long post. But I’m committed to answer everyone’s questions as fully as I can, as quickly as I can. Shoot me an email, I look forward to the coffee.
That goes for anyone else who’s interested too. My email is [email protected].
Emily is vulnerable because during the Charter debate she promised to offer an alternative proposal to eliminate one City Councilor at large position and create a 16 member Council. Yet to date, I have heard no alternative proposal before the Council. Voters remember.
Bryan, some concrete ideas regarding income inequality in Newton here:
https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/newton-aldermen-rescind
http://www.wickedlocal.com/x1433794021/Anatoly-Kleyman-Newtons-tax-relief-program-missing-something
Would you like to give some feedback?
Bryan, how would you have voted on the proposal to put an opt-out question on the ballot?
@Bryan
Have you considered striking an agreement with Emily to only take contributions from your Ward?
No idea how you can run for ward councilor after campaigning to abolish ward councilors and be trusted to do a good job in that position. I’ve heard great things about Bryan, but wish he stuck to his guns rather than doing this.
I personally don’t think that Bryan running for a ward seat, after supporting the charter reform, reflects poorly on him. The proposed changes to the charter were intended to make the Council more efficient and effective. For those that supported it, it seemed to be the best means to the desired end. That doesn’t mean that it was the only means to that end. Improvements can occur from within an existing structure, and to some extent from external forces. Maybe Bryan realized that if the Council structure can’t be changed, the next best thing is to campaign, try and get elected, and help facilitate change from within. Whether you support him or not, his efforts are admirable, and I think we all can agree that contested races are good for Newton.
@Bryan, Re: Your judgement versus the will of the people. What can be even more challenging is determining what the will of the people is. I’m sure you have experienced this before, but you’ll be faced with many situations where you are subjected to a very vocal minority that feel that they represent the majority. Determining what the real majority of residents want, when they are silent, can be extremely challenging.
Best of Luck!
Bryan shares the same policy positions as Jake and Susan regarding large scale housing development along Washington St. from Newton Corner to West Newton. This means more significant building demolition, loss of current commercial land use and a major population increase.
All 3 people thus far have not listened carefully to the residents most impacted by these changes. The NAC have completed a public charrette and 2 public surveys, one about Austin St. the other about Washington Pl. The 3 venues clearly demonstrated that 70% of Newtonville residents support some development no taller than 3 stories and less than 100 units.
So far, Emily Norton has voted to reflect the will of the residents. She worked hard to retain the ward councilors. Bryan fails to offer local residents a choice regarding major changes to our village. Why would anyone think he is a good challenger.
With him in office the Newton City Council would become 100% in favor of completely destroying our old historic villages with more dense housing development.
Bryan Barash offers those of us who want to limit dense housing
no alternative.
He along with the other Charter Commissioners failed to compromise about the elimination of ward councilors. Thus they completely lost credibility about their real purpose for Charter reform. It was not about improving government but rather consolidating the power of those who wish to completely transform our historic city.
In Bryan’s announcement he stated that he “believes strongly in the power of kindness, the impact of compromise, and the decency of the people who live here.” For me this speaks volumes as these are some of the most important values for those on the City Council. In a recent thread about former Mayor Tom Concannon, I stated that he always put Newton above politics. I truly believe that Bryan, like Tom, puts Newton before politics and self.
We need a councilor that will listen to all sides of an issue before forming an opinion which is important in such a diverse ward as we have here in Ward 2. Each precinct is very different and there is not a one-size fits all. I see him as one who unites people something that we need here in Newton as we have become an increasingly divided city, especially in Ward 2. I believe that Bryan presents us with the opportunity to elect a Councilor who will represent all four precincts with honesty, integrity and transparency.
I have known Bryan for years and have found him to be a man of character and one who will bring energy, creative thought, and a unique set of experiences to the City Council. Please join me in supporting Bryan for City Councilor, Ward 2.
Simon – Ward councilors vote on ALL citywide issues, and in that respect their votes make them accountable to all voters. Given the loss of the charter, we should expect a citywide interest in the ward councilor positions in the future. Accepting donations from the ward only would be acceptable if the ward councilors’ votes were restricted to ward specific issues.
@Peter Karg – “Emily is vulnerable because during the Charter debate she promised to offer an alternative proposal to eliminate one City Councilor at large position and create a 16 member Council. Yet to date, I have heard no alternative proposal before the Council. Voters remember.”
Emily and Rick Lipof not only offered the promised 8-8 proposal last fall, but for the first time in the 130+ year history of Newton, and after the the charter commission proposal was defeated, garnered a super majority 17-6 vote of the council in favor letting the citizens of Newton vote to downsize the council.
https://village14.com/2017/12/04/city-council-approves-8-8-proposal/
Unfortunately, under very strong pressure from YES supporters (who has previously stressed the importance of downsizing the council) the outgoing mayor vetoed a proposal that would have let Newton VOTERS decide if they wanted an 8-8 council. While 17 council votes would ordinarily be enough to override a veto, an override is not allowed for a home rule petition.
Since that time the new city council has been dealing with more pressing issues like the budget, while a subcommittee of Josh, Susan, David, and Lisle have spent the spring and summer going over the non-controversial articles in the charter proposal to extract items into a home rule petition that, if supported by the full council, can be submitted directly to the state without the need for citywide approval.
The subcommittee can next take up council composition in October, or proposals could be docketed directly to the council.
@Colleen Minaker, you may be right that a majority of Ward 2 residents are skeptical of development, but a contested election between two high-quality candidates is the only way to know for sure. I live in another ward, but as I recall, Emily ran unopposed in 2017, when pro-smart-development candidates generally did well in both at-large and ward votes.
John White, thank you for your response. I agree about Smart Growth, however this is not the case in Newtonville.
The new development on Washington St. and Austin St. is not smart growth. If it were many residents would have supported it.
Now that our community better understands the destructive nature of this low quality housing, people will be prepared to make an informed vote about the future of Washington St.
The negative impacts of this questionable growth will have unanticipated consequences for Newtonville residents for example, insufficient parking, unsafe traffic conditions, poor public transit, higher taxes, loss of commercial zones and lastly the push to move out current home owners.
Bryan Barash supports housing policies which do not better the lives of Newtonville residents.
Jack – The pressure came from the No on the charter people. The previous mayor refused to be bullied into a completely inappropriate 11th hour action on the part of the city council. Probably one of the lowest moments in Newton city council history. You continue to rewrite history of the charter review through your personal lens, but to do so at the expense of other peoples’ reputations is really something else. Just give it up. It happened. Move on.
@Jane — I didn’t raise the charter issue here. I’m just correcting an incorrect assertion stating no alternate proposal had been put before the city council and assigning blame for that to Emily.
“Process” was advanced as the rationale for killing the 8-8 proposal, but in my opinion, the 2 year charter commission process and vote (as well as Rick’s extensive previous research identifying 8-8 as the most appropriate composition and previous non-binding city-wide referendums supporting it) provided quite a bit of “process” around 8-8, and the vote was not to implement 8-8, but to put the question to the voters (allowing 1-2 years of debate and process in lead up to that vote).
The Yes group repeatedly accused the No group of not really believing in 8-8, and quite confidently predicted that the 8-8 proposal would be dropped if the CC proposal was defeated. Following through on that commitment was a low moment? I’m guessing not following through would also be a low moment? Sounds like lose-lose scenario.
The 8-8 proposal was only “11th hour” because the YES group acted to block any discussion, hearings, or debate on it in the months leading up to the election.
The net result of the veto was denying residents the option for an up or down vote this fall on a city council 33% smaller than what we have today, that retains local representation, and that make all races head to head. Whether you see blocking that as helping or hurting anyone’s reputation depends on where you stand on the issue.
What became clear in that post-election portion of the debate is the “issue” is the YES’s contention that ward-elected councilors are resistant to change, yet they are supporting change to recreational mj in a much higher proportion than at-large councilors. That includes the ward 1 & 2 ward-elected councilors assured of having Garden Remedies as recreational dispensary in their area in any scenario short of a full opt out.
@Jane — Below is your comment on this topic from September 17th, 2017. When the city council acted contrary to these predictions under Emily’s leadership, that was the lowest point in their history. Sigh.
https://village14.com/2017/09/21/is-home-rule-a-better-solution-to-charter-reform/#comment-80466
“Yes, a home rule petition is possible, but please keep in mind the following: Newton has had two nonbinding referendums asking voters if they would like to see City Council (then the Board of Aldermen) downsized. Both times the referendum passed by an overwhelming majority – by a 2 to 1 margin.
What happened as a result? Nothing. Despite the best efforts of several Aldermen, they were not able to get the majority of their peers to agree to a home rule petition. Unless the City Council votes to submit a home rule petition, it does not happen.
Citizens began to collect signatures to put the charter review on the ballot because the City Council refused to submit a home rule petition to downsize itself. Why would anyone expect the Council to address the issue now after they’ve refused to deal with for 18 years?
Right now, the Ward Councilors are campaigning heavily against a charter proposal that eliminates their position. In order for the City Council to submit a home rule petition, you’d have to get the At-Large Councilors to sign on to have half of THEIR positions eliminated. So we’d end up with a different set of Councilors campaigning heavily against the proposal.
The City Council has been given a mandate – twice – to submit a home rule petition to downsize itself and in 18 years, it hasn’t happened. Why does anyone think the situation is going to change now? If the charter is voted down, we will most likely have a City Council of 24 members – by far the largest in Massachusetts – for the next 45-50 years.”
A few general observations:
1) I know the Charter debate still burns strong with a few folks. But most everyone else has moved on. The vote happened. Absent something new on the legislative front, I really don’t see that as an issue to discuss at this point. I suppose Bryan and Emily’s positions on opposite sides encourages such chatter, but unless either of them are going to focus on that one issue, I view it as a moot point. Or at least a really boring point.
2) Colleen and others keep pointing to the various unscientific polls and the “charrette” put on the village council, but I’d like to remind everyone that the “polls” could be taken as many times as you liked, and the “charrette” was attended mostly by one side of the development debate, because the Village area council’s view at this point are fairly well known (and the city had made known it was holding its own public events shortly thereafter and I believe had asked the area council not to confuse folks…). So let’s be clear: That 70% that Colleen mentions has no basis in scientific polling, logically doesn’t make sense based on recent election results in ward 2, and is basically very passionate people polling themselves on the issue they are passionate about. Picture a room full of Democrats giving themselves a poll about Donald Trump… No one has done an accurate poll on the subject of development in Newtonville, and public events are NOT a good indicator of any type of support. I’d say the same thing if Newton put out a B.S. poll of the same type, or claimed “hello Washington” street indicated 70% for development.
3) You know what is a reliable indicator of community thought, although not on just one issue? ELECTIONS. And the NVA run candidate didn’t win 50% in Ward 2. If you look at the recent elections and follow how we actually voted in Ward 2, it seems far more likely to me that we are a split Ward almost 50% on issues of development. Which isn’t surprising, considering how much development we are getting. And I believe that number to be HIGHER than most of Newton, meaning that in comparison we are a village/ward that is more apprehensive about development. Again, no surprise. But to say that 70% of folks in Newtonville are against development is just complete and utter nonsense. I don’t think you can get 70% of Newtonville to agree on anything. Except maybe that we love Cabot’s ice cream. And even then, lots of folks like Rancatores, so who the hell knows.
4) I see that a few supporters of Emily has mentioned that both candidates should limit contributions from outside the ward. This makes no sense to me, for their candidate. I’d imagine that Emily is going to get lots of contributions from the No campaign. And frankly, you don’t need much money to run a ward campaign. Both candidates will have plenty of money. Hyper location elections like this one run on shoe leather, not money. You need enough for signs, for door hangers, for pizza for volunteers. But who the heck does tv ads for a ward campaign? Folks walk the ward. On this, the No campaign always had it right. You can actually meet every voter in Ward 2. Emily and Bryan don’t need money, they need time. And with Bryan declaring early, I’m sure he will be visiting every voter in Newtonville over the next 15 months. I’m sure I’ll see Emily soon too.
5) I know there are many folks for Emily on this blog. I’m sure there are some folks happy to support Bryan too. And I’ve got no issues with anyone posting on this election. But what really matters are those of us who actually live in Ward 2. And I think one thing that will end up mattering is now development or Washington Street, but how Emily has been on ward service. I really don’t know the answer to that, since I usually feel I get my information from Jake (his newsletter and office hours). But I know some folks who think she is the best ward councilor in the city, and others who were/are very frustrated with her local service. There was some frustration with the Cabot elementary school community which continues to linger. Again, I fully realize Emily has a different view of how the Cabot delay came down, but I’m guessing that will be a topic to discuss for some Ward 2 residents. And it could be that local service, if the fans outweigh the folks who are frustrated, make this a very difficult race for Bryan to win. Or it could be that Emily, in her quest to preserve ward councilors and influence the debate on zoning/construction across the city, lost track of her own ward in the process. That would be ironic, but possible too. But I think in the end the local matters far more than the city wide. At least for me it does.
Cheers to all. Thanks for reading, and good luck to both candidates.
Also a final note: I admire anyone who runs for these jobs, and anyone who serves as a city councilor. Because the pay is so low, and the hours so crazy, that it really is public service. To run for these positions, to give up family time and personal time and nights and weekends, to be criticized by your neighbors and face annoyed voters and defend yourself, well…that’s just a tough job. You have to really love your community to do it. Because WHY ELSE would you do it.
We all have a tendency to be very vocal on the blog and in our daily lives, about our politicians. They are public and I think we all feel we have the right. And maybe the larger elections deserve the vitriol and Sturm und Drang they stir up in us. But let’s try and remember (me included) the first paragraph before we launch into things locally.
Cheers again,
Figgy.
Yeah lobbying hard to eliminate Ward councilors only to run for one is very hypocritical. It’s like saying you’re a vegetarian, but will eat meat if there’s some at the party.
Hey all! Rainy days are no fun, I hope everyone is staying dry. I’m about to head out to deliver some Joe Kennedy for Congress lawn signs, but see there’s a few more questions for me here.
@Anatoly – I am very interested in options for reducing income inequality and in proposals that will make it easier for those who live here to stay here, especially if their living situation is cost-burdened (>30% of income spent on housing). I’ve begun looking into your question about water / sewer rates. Interested in whether we can lower costs further for lower income residents. I know the city went through a planning process for sewer/water infrastructure, and that Deb Crossley was instrumental in that, so I’ll be seeking her advice.
In terms of residential tax exemptions, I think they are a good tool to make our tax system more progressive. I would love to see Newton adopt one, so long as the financial implications make sense for the city.
@Newtoner – I do not support putting an opt out question on the ballot. The people of Newton have already decided this issue. We must now begin the hard work of figuring out how best to regulate marijuana dispensaries, which is why I support asking voters whether we should limit the number of dispensaries, as the Council has done.
@Simon – I am concerned about the influence money can have in politics. That is why I made it a core aspect of my announcement and have a page on my website detailing the contributions I am voluntarily refusing. See here: https://www.bryanbarash.com/clean-campaign
@Fig:
re: charter: We have an active working charter subcommittee and report due to council in the next month or 2. Perhaps its over for the term given that super majority in favor of 8-8 is gone and there is no majority for slight edits of the original CC composition proposal, but its not dead.
re: spending and election results: Brenda just spent a ward-councilor record $19K on a close election. Jake just spent an at-large record $56K for his election and reelection and citywide spending impacts ward voter awareness as well.
Agree on the work our officials and candidates do in running and serving. It is to be appreciated.
Bryan,
You are delivering Joe Kennedy for Congress lawn signs. Joe Kennedy is firmly against marijuana legalization. You do not support putting an opt out question on the ballot. I’m confused, and please don’t tell me “we already voted”. We voted for the statewide legalization with the assumption that each city or town retains the right to regulate the local pot commerce.
@Anatoly – Sure, I absolutely support Congressman Kennedy and oppose putting opt out on the ballot. Joe has been a great Congressman. His values and the things he stands up for, and his integrity, are second to none. I’m just not a single issue voter, the most important thing to me is that my elected officials share my values.
If the voters of Ward 2 give me the opportunity to serve, I can only hope I live up to his example of being able to disagree without being disagreeable while treating every voter with dignity and respect.
@SoccerMommy: I don’t follow your logic. It’s one thing to propose changing the form of ward representation, but since the change that Bryan and others advocated for did not come to pass, why should he not run under the system that we have?
@Anatoly: You can advocate for a candidate without necessarily agreeing with all of their positions, no?
I just had a positive exchange with Emily Norton. Emily assures me that she is still strongly committed to an 8-8 proposal and will be working to help make that happen.
@ Bryan Barash “I can only hope I live up to his example of being able to disagree without being disagreeable while treating every voter with dignity and respect.”
Sorry Bryan, but here on Village 14 at least I found you (mostly your tone with a touch of arrogance) plenty disagreeable when you were lobbying for the Yes vote. Meanwhile I found Emily to be courageous and tenacious. I don’t live in Ward 2 but I anticipate volunteering for Emily.
I’d like to add my 2 cents on the charter issue.
A. I’m still here in Newton and am watching patiently to see what happens. B. My promise to our elected officials, as long as I’m in Newton I’m watching YOU (each and everyone of you) and C. if things don’t happen with cutting the size of the Board in a couple of years, I will find 10-15 people to go out and start the process all over and collect the 15% all over again….DO YOUR JOBS and KEEP YOUR PROMISES!!!
I know it doesn’t happen overnight, but it’s not going to go another 20 years before another vote. Just do it.
Sincerely, Frustrated))))
@Claire – I’m so sorry if I came off that way. It was never my intention. I would love to meet you in person and get to know each other in real life. Coffee sometime?
@Robert: “You can advocate for a candidate without necessarily agreeing with all of their positions, no?” Yes, but you should be well aware of his arguments on the issue (can be found here: https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2018/03/08/joe-kennedy-iii-marijuana). And if you are, you should understand why many people share his concerns. And if you understand that, you shouldn’t be opposed to the people request just to vote, and you should be more accurate with statements like “The people of Newton have already decided this issue”.
“I believe strongly in the power of kindness”. So be kind to the parents who fear for their kids’ safety and don’t make them collect 6000 signatures just for the sheer pain of it. No?
Claire, you have made an erroneous statement.
While I agree that Bryan’s tone at times seemed arrogant and a bit condescending during the charter argument, Emily’s was aggressive and insulting. Emily can be brash and occasionally dishonest in her quest to quell development in Newtonville as well. You have your choice of reasons to volunteer for Emily against Bryan, but that isn’t one of them. I don’t know how my vote will go yet, but I don’t vote emotionally so I’ll be looking at the substance behind the disagreements.
I’m looking forward to having a contested election for the Ward 2 City Councilor. We haven’t had one since Emily Norton ran unopposed for the seat. She’s continued to run unopposed which to me isn’t an election. I am looking forward to hearing more about Bryan’s campaign in the future.
Our 3 ward 2 Councilors now agree on some things and disagre on others. Jake differs from the other two on marijuana. Emily difers on development from the other two. Susan is very proactive with both the schools, Newtonville Village center and what’s going on with development. At this point, I would say Susan is the most engaged in various community matters, development too.
Even with Jake’s meeting hours which the others have as well, I find him the least responsive to the community. I had high hopes for Jake and like his well-thought out reasoned arguments on most things, including his monthly newsletter. Although I would vote for him again against Brendan.
I disagree with Bryan almost as much as I agree with him on issues, his positions on other city matters and the manner he uses to express his positions. Same with Emily. I like councilors who can listen to their constituents and have a civil, reasoned discussion with both parties leaving a little more enlightened. It’s going to be an interesting campaign.
Emily ran against Eve Tapper for Ward Rep in 2013. Emily won that election and hasn’t had a challenger after that.
Marti, Claire wrote that she found Bryan to be “disagreeable” and Emily to be “courageous and tenacious” during the charter debate. Those were her perceptions. You found Emily to be “aggressive and insulting”, so clearly your perception was different. But that doesn’t make Claire’s perception of Emily “erroneous” it is what it is.
@Anatoly: I imagine that someone who is as politically active as Bryan would be well aware of Joe Kennedy’s position on marijuana decriminalization and recreational use. It does not however follow that he should acquiesce to the demands of those who share those particular views.
For what it’s worth, I too have kids in the Newton school system, and I do not fear the opening of licensed retail outlets for marijuana, any more than I would the presence of a liquor store. Let’s stop with the Reefer Madness.
Thanks Tricia! I was going to write something similar but you stated it perfectly
@Robert: You do not fear, but they do. And the simple question is: who is in the majority? The majority should prevail. And only voting can produce the answer. What’s wrong with this?
@Anatoly: Isn’t that why we have elected representatives and licensing boards? There’s a reason we have a high bar for citizen petitions.
@Robert: I think the majority of our elected representatives are not making a good judgement when they try to suppress the vote. It’s about redefining the city’s character. Maybe the time has come for that. But the verdict should come not from Garden Remedies lobbyists, and even not from the entire City Council, but from the electorate, I think.
I am with Andrea – excited to see a race and I too think that Bryan will be an excellent candidate.
@Brian You may find it interesting that it was your posts on V14 early on in the charter debate that motivated me to speak loud and often against the Charter.
My NO stance had nothing to do for or against the issues – development or otherwise. I went NO because I thought the strategy and rhetoric of the YES campaign … Including your advocacy here on v14 was dishonest and deceitful.
And even now, after hundreds of discussions, I still believe this to be true. I would never vote for you because I don’t feel you are trustworthy. I think your progressive agenda would take priority over listening to and serving your constituents.