Seems only fair to give Councilor Lisle Baker’s response to my commentary on an unedited transcript of his six-minute remarks at the 2/11/19 Zoning and Planning meeting somewhat more prominence than the 93d comment on a thread. What follows is his unedited comment. You can see it as it appeared as a comment here.
What do you think? Did he adequately respond to the substantive criticisms? Did he stake the moral high ground? Are there open questions? Let us know in the comments. — Sean Roche
I am late to reading this column and these posts. All I can report is simply that a number of citizens have expressed concerns that what is being proposed for Washington Street is not yet wise policy. In this case, I have tried to express my reservations about larger scale development, removing parking minimums and reducing travel lanes without better alternatives. (For the record, I chaired a Committee of the Boston Bar Association that advocated for bicycle incentives as far back as the mid-1970’s and I regularly rode my bike to work downtown.) More important, I hope that the tone of Mr. Roche’s sidebar comments does not chill the willingness of others to express their concerns about whatever is proposed so that the Council can work through what makes sense, recognizing that reasonable people may still disagree. Also, I hope that those who have worked with me have felt treated fairly and respectfully. If not, I will try to make it right, as we should be able to disagree without being disagreeable. In the meantime, I am glad to talk in person with anyone on this forum or otherwise, including Mr. Roche, and my home phone is 617-566-3848. Thank you. – Councilor Lisle Baker
Newton is a fantastic place largely because of its historic fortunate geographic location vis a vis Boston metro as well as past residences creating what is now an an affluent attractive valuable housing stock. Newton will likely survive all the ‘do-good’ efforts essentially to de-gentrify the city by crowding and creating cheaper available housing, by virtue of the magnitude of what already exists. Having said this, any effort to improve the looks and feel of the Washington Street corridor will enhance the city — so long as imbued with the input of the likes of Councilor Baker.
(BTW, Sean Roche disparaged me simply because I mistakenly misspelled a commenter’s name.)
@Sean thanks for posting Councilor Baker’s post which seems very reasonable.
It would be nice if this were accompanied by a retraction of the previous comments that described him as “patronizing,” “sexist” and more, but perhaps that will be forthcoming.
There are 2 issues which be disastrous
1- empty store fronts. would lead to the look of ‘blight’
2- increased density but still unacceptable public transportation options. Would force these residents to buy cars just to get to work. Have the perverse affect of increased pollution, noise and traffic (the very issues we wanted to mitigate!)
While I generally disagree with Councilor Baker on the subject matter, I think the post in question was one of the ugliest and most disrespectful in V14’s history. If I owned this blog, posts like this would get me worried about its future position as Newton’s main opinion marketplace. To be honest, I’m surprised and impressed by Baker’s cool and polite response.
@Newtoner: Councilor Baker is a true gentlemen and respects everyone’s opinions even when they differ radically from his own. That is what makes him a great City Councilor and despite what some may think, Councilor Baker represents a view point in this City that deserves to be heard.
I agree with @Newtoner. The initial post reads as an unnecessary slamming of the Councilor, when in reality it’s reflecting only Sean Roche’s personal opinions via the annotations, which were quite polarizing in a few cases. Hope to not see anything more like this on V14 if I am going to trust it as a source for local news.
I agree with Newtoner and Anon. And Councilor Baker should be commended for what is clearly a heartfelt response.
@Sean
On your bike!
@ Sean, you come across as you are on a bit of a power trip pointing out that YOU have the power to be “fair” by reposting Councilor Baker’s post. Get off your high horse..bike. And while you are at it an apology for your dog whistle regarding Councilor Baker is in order
I agree with many of the above comments. I don’t always agree with Baker, but Sean’s blog post was unneccesarily brutal and needlessly snarky. It shouldn’t have even been on V14 as it was.
Councilor Baker is respectful of all at all times.
Mr. Roche has forever been a less-than-constructive member of Newton’s online community.
That he is among the “leaders” of this blog is one reason why Village 14 has the reputation it does in Newton as a less-than-serious forum for discussion of what really are some serious issues facing our city.
@Jane, on the previous thread about Councilor Baker’s comments, you said, “What Sean said about the tone of his comment to Councilor Albright. He shouldn’t speak to women in such a demeaning manner, nor should Michael use an ageist comment in reference to Councilor Baker. It’s okay to let Councilor Baker’s inappropriate statement stand on its own.”
I’m glad to see you’ve changed your tune and you now think, “Councilor Baker is respectful of all at all times.”
I like to see that V14 discussions can sometimes convince people to change their minds!
Elmo- is there a more serious forum in Newton? As an outsider I find V14 filled with valuable information that other towns can learn from. But I am also a newbie here so I would appreciate some info on other public forums if they exist.
Thanks, Lisa
What Elmo said. I used to enjoy participating in this forum, and especially after being elected, felt it was important as a City Councilor that I do so. But it has turned into such a cesspool of vitriol even tough chicks like me have moved on. As for Councilor Baker, I have observed him to treat his colleagues, as well as members of the public, in a uniformly respectful manner. Certain Village 14 hosts and bloggers would do well to follow his lead.
Jim Epstein —
I apologize for jumping the gun on my part. I updated my comment.
Councilor Norton,
Welcome back. We hope you return more often.
If nothing else, you sure can turn a phrase: cesspool of vitriol. Catchy.
Claire,
I want to be very clear. I very carefully did not accuse Councilor Baker of intentionally using a dog whistle, but rather chided him for not being more attuned to the fact that “urban” can be a dog whistle and falls on some ears as offensive and hurtful. In this instance, Councilor Baker was thoughtless, not racist.
Please note the difference in language between my comment on his use of “urban” and my comment that Councilor Baker engaged in sexism.
If, in the future, a councilor says or does something that merits being called a racist, I will do so plainly.
Sarah – I was aware of my first comment as I wrote the second one. Councilor Baker is a gentleman at all times to all people. But in this particular case, he used language that he would never use with one of his male colleagues. It wasn’t as awful as Sean described, but the first time I read the thread, I did so skipping over Sean’s commentary. In that reading, referring to a female councilor as “wonderful” absolutely jumped out at me as demeaning. I should have just let my comment stand on its own rather than referring back to Sean’s which does not reflect my sense of
But the best part about Councilor Baker is that the next time I see him, I’ll playfully warn him not to call me “wonderful”, and he will profusely reassure me that he would NEVER consider doing such a thing. 😉
Yes, Sean’s column was filled with snark and I disagree that the word “urban” in the context used by Councilor Baker could be viewed as having racist implications, even if unintended. So I don’t think Councilor Baker was guilty of even being “thoughtless.” Urban in this context simply refers to density. Sometimes I think we look for insult when it simply does not exist.
That being said, I also think some of the comments disparaging V14 for publishing an opinion piece like Sean’s miss the point: It was intended to be edgy and provocative, even if I think it could have been written using less sarcasm and without the feel of a personal attack. But this is a blog, not a news site, so almost anything goes.
As for the whole development debate, I generally agree with those in the “pro-development” camp including Sean Roche (though I am not nearly as idealogical regarding transportation). While Newton can and should be more bike/pedestrian friendly, the majority of us are still going to rely greatly on automobiles. There’s just no getting around that.
Councilor Norton, you are indeed a “tough chick” and I have missed seeing your comments here. Welcome back Emily! Keep fighting the good fight (even when we disagree).
Hmm…some of our posters here doth protest too much, methinks.
Sean tends to post comments that leave me shaking my head in both directions. But there does appear to be a sudden outbreak of selective outrage. It is of course possible to disagree with posters without declaring that the blog is hell on earth. I think Councilor Baker did so very well actually, addressing Sean’s comments without resorting to a negative response or insulting anyone. And clearly Mr. Baker has a large number of admirers and defenders on the blog. For a horrible “cesspool” of posters, I count far more defenders than detractors.
It is entirely possible (and fair) to criticize Councilor Baker on some issues. Some of the other posters did so with far more detail and specificity than I could, but I certainly have disagreed with his positions in the past, including the winter parking ban and the accessory apartment morass. It is entirely possible to disagree with the positions he takes and also appreciate him for his gentlemanly air. You can certainly like someone personally and disagree strongly with his or her political positions, or wish to change some of those positions while agreeing with others.
In the end, this is an interesting time for Newton. Major changes are occurring in the north part of the city. And even more changes are proposed. I still think this blog will be a great community soapbox for folks to voice their opinions, especially on zoning and next years election.
I don’t want to continue the piling on that Sean’s been subjected to as these two posts wind down. To use an old boxing term, but I felt from the outset that he was leading with his right when he decided to take on one of Newton’s most seasoned and venerable public servants. I was also pretty certain that Lisle would bide his time and respond with grace and good humor.
Pro development forces have been clearly in ascendancy here for several years. Again, I support many of their objectives and certain of the projects they have been promoting here. But another side of me is uneasy that the benefits of these development projects are being greatly oversold, while some serious and irrevocable drawbacks get continually dismissed. We need people like Lisle Baker in the City Council who can help temper the enthusiasm of the Council’s pro development majority. And yes, I also miss my old friend Brian Yates and his wise counsel and institutional memory. This is nothing against our newer members who performed yeoman work in Newton before being elected, but the old song “you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s lost” relates to some of the downsides I and others perceive.