I’m happy to announce that I’m running to be the next ward councilor for Ward 3. People from my ward and from other villages of Newton have been encouraging me to run this year – some urging me to represent my ward, others urging me to run at-large. Now that there is an open seat, it’s an easy decision to run for the ward seat. I worked hard on the campaign to save ward representation in our charter, and if elected, I will be proud to represent Ward 3.
I am running to represent residents who don’t currently feel listened to. I will talk to as many Ward 3 residents as I can between now and the November 5 election, and I hope to earn your vote.
I have lived most of my life in West Newton. I graduated from Newton High School, studied Economics at MIT and earned my MBA from the University of Chicago. I worked in finance until switching to a career as a photojournalist for the Lowell Sun.
I’m a longtime environmental advocate, and care deeply about open space, historic preservation, and maintaining Newton’s socio-economic and ethnic diversity. I’m a member of the Urban Tree Commission, and a founder and currently president of the Newton Tree Conservancy. I am committed to transparency and communication with my constituents — as a journalist, this is second nature. I already record many city meetings for which there would otherwise be no record, and share them with the West Newton google group and other online forums. Many people tell me I am their source for what is going on in Newton.
I’m alarmed by the rapid pace of urbanization, gentrification and displacement in our city. The negative impacts of developers’ agendas on our local democracy, cost of living, tax burden, fiscal debt, school overcrowding, traffic and quality of life are distressing to many Newton residents. They tell me they worry about being pushed out of their homes, and out of Newton. I hear them, I want to help them, and I hope to represent them.
I’m also encouraged and inspired by a surge of interest among residents of Ward 3/West Newton in what’s going on in city government. Everybody’s busy — with jobs, kids, parents, volunteer activities — but more and more people are finding time to read zoning codes, write letters, go to meetings, and organize. For the last three months I’ve been active with the Unite! West Newton group, one of several new village-based groups that have organized to have a real say about the future of their villages.
This surge in local activism is because increasing numbers of residents around the city are concerned about the number of development and rezoning proposals, the rapid pace and difficulty of keeping up with the review process, and ‘visionings’ that end up more reflective of the administration and developers’ visions than the input of the community.
Voters want choices, and incumbents need challengers.
I am happy to see first-time candidates like Tarik Lucas and Jennifer Bentley stepping up to run in Ward 2, and hope more resident-focused candidates from other wards will venture to run after my announcement today.
For more information about me, please visit www.juliamalakie.org. My door knocking begins this week and I look forward to meeting each and every Ward 3 voter — I am running to represent YOU!
Wonderful! I think the turn out will be great this year as residents feel they are being ignored.
Julia
Didn’t you once suggest that as a money saving measure the city should collect trash less frequently? I believe it was termed by some who heard it as a “pro-growth program for rats and raccoons.”
Which councilors or candidates in your opinion are not “resident-focused”?
Newtoner,
Watch any (or all) of the zoning meetings. You can clearly see that the majority of residents are angry, confused and generally not happy about the increased density.
Please direct me to a few meetings where residents were welcoming density with open arms? Perhaps Waban or Newton centre meetings since they will not be affected by the zoning change?
Councilors whose views do not reflect this are clearly not listening to their residents. We have councilors who want to use the zoning for “social engineering” purposes instead of what the majority of residents want which is:
– good schools
– stable and low property taxes
– low crime
– functioning city services
I don’t recall “putting the needs of non-residents above resident needs” being a majority consensus
Julia is being upfront and not hiding behind “vague statements”.
“The majority” is angry about development? Not according to the results of the last election, in which development was probably the most contested issue. IMO he majority is just quiet, that’s all. But I guess we’ll just have to wait and see in November.
That said, I did vote for Julia twice because of her fabulous work with the Tree Conservancy, and think she would make a good councilor.
What Newtoner said. There have been a lot of folks supporting housing diversity at the meetings for Northland and at the Riverside visioning meetings, including citizens who place a high value on affordable housing, workforce housing, senior housing, transit oriented development, walkabout and reducing our carbon footprint.
Fixed link here.
@David, yup, that was me, although I was not recommending it be done in isolation, and I raised it as an idea that could potentially reduce the cost of collecting and disposing of solid waste, rather than just shifting the cost. I’m not a big fan of Pay As You Throw unless it’s coupled with a tax underride to be revenue neutral; otherwise I see PAYT as another sort of sneaky way to increase taxes without putting it to the voters in a Prop 2-1/2 override.
When I say not in isolation, I mean alternate week trash collection would be coupled with weekly collection of household compostables — the food waste that smells and attracts the rats. I’m pretty sure this would actually make life more difficult for rats and raccoons because as you’ve probably noticed, the lids on our trash bins are not tight. But the lids on compostables buckets are very tight. Alternate week trash collection is something that some cities with curbside compostable collection have done. See page 30 of this interesting report: https://dusp.mit.edu/sites/dusp.mit.edu/files/attachments/project/Municipal%20Curbside%20Compostables%20Collection%20%20What%20Works%20and%20Why.pdf
About Toronto:
So evidently there were savings. The same page also talks about people in Portland, Oregon, adjusting to a similar schedule. I don’t know anyone in either city, but if anyone does, I’d be interested in how they feel about it.
I’m also interested in hearing from anyone who was in on the Bootstrap compostables collection pilot about a year ago. I was in it, along with a limited number of people on a couple of trash routes I believe in Auburndale as well as West Newton. We were selected by lottery after our neighborhoods were selected because of a high level of interest. I liked being in it, although except for a freezer cleanout of turkey drippings I’d never turned into gravy, I didn’t produce much volume. I’d like to know how it worked for people with more typical food waste volumes.
Just separating compostables from other trash would have an environmental benefit, producing something of value (compost), and could help reduce tipping fees by reducing the volume of regular trash, and the contamination of recyclables. It may or may not have a significant impact on collection costs, depending in part on how often people put out their bins now. Are there a lot of half empty bins being put out every week, that would save stops and labor time if they were only being put out every other week? Or would the expense of the compostables collection trips cancel out that savings?
I’m disappointed only because I can’t vote for Julia if she is running for a ward-specific seat.
You’ll do a fantastic job representing Ward 3!
Another Newton election year, another opportunity for a bunch of NIMBYs to run and get their usual 40% or so and lose to mainstream candidates who value modernization and progress and who don’t want to keep Newton mired in the 1950s. I’m not worried about those Ward 2 NIMBYs, they’ll be trounced by Albright & Auchincloss, but I’m hoping somebody more reasonable enters this ward 3 race. Not that I don’t respect Julia for all she’s done environmentally, because I do, and hope she continues to do so, just not as a member of the City Council, where her lack of support for upgrading Newton’s housing stock would be a significant setback to modernization.
I wish I could vote for Julia as well.
For anyone who questions if Newton’s residents are fed up with not being heard and frustrated at Big Developers’ influence in Newton today, show up at the Council meeting Tue night (5/14, 7pm) at City Hall and see for yourself.
Best of luck, Julie!
Hard pass. I thought that in spite of her advocacy for trees it was alarming how many paper mailings I received from her the last time she ran.
As for which side has more support pro-development vs anti, I suspect it’s more of a spectrum than with a lot of residents not falling firmly on one side or another.
I am a Ward 3 voter and I agree with Gerry on this one, both for his praise and his criticism of Julia’s position.
Watching zoning meetings is no indication of how the majority of people feel. We’ve seen studies showing that the people who turn out do not represent the demographic makeup of a city and tend to skew older, whiter and more conservative (in that they are resistant to change). We have a city that has started to diversify and needs to find a way to attract younger residents. We have a demographer who says that our schools will not continue to grow (because of this lack of younger people moving in) and housing stock that is already unaffordable. Plus, it’s primarily of a single type: single-family homes. This idea that there is a traunch of “naturally affordable” homes just doesn’t hold water.
I agree with Julia’s environmental positions and that the city must address debt and traffic issues, but I disagree that blocking development is the way to get that done.
If we want to change, then we need to actually change.
I appreciate Julie Malakie’s passion for Newton’s trees. My front yard and my neighborhood are a direct beneficiary of those street trees, thanks to her.
But good people can disagree over whether or not her opposition to solar panels in our public parking lots was a sound environmental position.
@MMQC Alarmed at number of paper mailings? Do you have me confused with Ruthanne Fuller? All I could afford was one door hanger (hand distributed, not mailed), and one postcard. I’m very puzzled.
@MattLai “I wish I could vote for Julia as well.” …. you could have voted for Julia if you would have voted for the Charter. 😉
A little Alanis Morissette for you… Enjoy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jne9t8sHpUc
-jack
Hi Julia,
We received 4 of your mailers at my address plus the door hanger. Of course, we received way more from Mayor Fuller.
Chuck,
Fortunately, we live in a democracy and I think this election can finally put to rest the ‘direction’ the majority of residents prefer because the zoning vote will be after the election.
BTW, those who did show up for meetings should be have their concerns taken seriously. Just because they have a specific skin color, age & demographic does not mean their concerns should be ignored. Isn’t this the very definition of intolerance? EVERYONE who wants to voice their support or concern should be treated equally.. but they have to exercise the right by making your voice heard because we live in a democracy
I have yet to see any video of a public meeting where residents were not skeptical. Surely there must be an opposing grass-roots ‘Right Size’ campaign not sponsored by a developer?
I never suggested that their concerns should NOT be heard, but it’s important that they are heard in context.
Also, if you did watch the meetings you would see that affordable housing advocates come out in numbers, as do people who live near these proposals and believe that they are the right thing to do.
Vocal skeptics look at Hello Washington Street and think that voices weren’t heard, but if you take a more positive lens you may conclude that the process (which included storefronts as well as neighborhood gatherings and outreach deep into the community) was more inclusive than just the people who show up to city hall, and those voices were, in fact, heard.
Julia,
“Praise the Lord” ! A breath of fresh air ! Finally someone willing to question development ( developers /Trump ), in the city ! This and someone to establish a REAL tree replacement program, ( and perhaps address the tree killing gas leaks ), we need to keep the “Garden City”a place we thought we were buying into when moving here.
@MMQC I don’t suppose you still have those mailings? Do you recall if they all came at the same time? Or if they were to four different registered voters or apartments at your address? They had to have been the same postcard because I only had the one.
I certainly didn’t pay the printer (who does the mailing somehow with a supplied list of addresses generated by computer somehow) to mail four times to the same person. I would like to know how they were addressed if you remember, and see if there’s a way to clean up these computerized lists to eliminate redundancies before a mailing is sent out. Thank you for bringing this up!
Julia,
Some advice (as you can probably foresee from comments)..
Be prepared to be called the following “racist, ignorant, elitist, white, selfish, etc”. When the facts cannot be argued the ‘cards’ come out.. wishing you all the best and I hope your strong support can get you past these attacks..
Come on Budek: This has been an entirely reasonable discussion between good folks sharing different perspectives: exactly what should happen during a campaign. There’s been no name calling, card pulling, attacks or anything else….expect for you suggesting otherwise.
Julia, What is your position on reducing the size of the City Council? What would you propose to make it happen?
Greg,
Please…. just look at todays post about Somerville. Anyway, I hope its amicable (for the most part)
Actually it has been amicable, except for you! This is my last comment here about this.
I was with Julia last time. I’ll be with her again in this race.
@Chuck. It’s a pretty broad sweep of the brush to pigeonhole older voters as simply being more conservative and resistant to change than younger folks are. Sure, we have our share of yahoos, but I’ve found most seniors tend to be skeptical rather than reactionary in how they respond or react to proposals and promises that governments and the private sector regularly lavish on them. And I believe there are instances where this skepticism is warranted.
I don’t dispute your experience, but this study from BU (http://sites.bu.edu/kleinstein/files/2017/09/EinsteinPalmerGlick_ZoningPartic.pdf) as well as this related study (https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/8/27/who-is-the-public-at-public-meetings) suggests that’s not the case.
The studies found that the public commenters tended to skew older and, in many communities, disproportionately represented homeowners rather than renters. They also tended to be whiter and more male than the overall population.
Those commenters tended to be opposed to new development, even when the overall electorate showed that it favored affordable housing initiatives.
I’m not just offering my own observations here. My only conclusion from all of this is that, based on studies and analysis done in our own region, we cannot assume that the voices in the room, no matter how loud, reflect the opinions of the majority of the city.
@BobBurke Many folks in Newton are the epitome of contradiction when it comes to politics – It is groovy to be liberal on the federal level while when it comes to the local level the skepticism your refer to is rather Trumpian. It is protectionism. No matter how many Bernie or Adlai Stevenson stickers are on Newton bumpers, you can’t be truly Progressive unless you embrace Progress. Protectionism is not Progressive so lets not conflate the two.
You’ve stated on numerous occasions that you were one of the first ones to embrace Bernie Sanders. I know this may be hard to hear but there is no way that Bernie, AOC or Our Revolution would stand for any of this anti-development protectionism or even Historic Districts. How do we know? Because we’ve sent emails to Nina Turner & Deborah Parker complaining about the contradictory local views from the local Newton chapter.
@Bugek No one is calling anyone a racist but rather have pointed out the unintended consequences from Historic districts and anti-development zoning that disproportionately impacts people of color.
Jack,
How ‘far’ should a progressive go? When you file your taxes, do you write an ‘extra’ check to the US government to make sure you have paid your “fair share” incase you were able to take advantage of tax breaks?
Being progressive does not mean you have to go “all in”. Perhaps some may feel strongly about climate change but not immigration. Or strongly support public schools but not high density etc etc
Perhaps one could argue the new zoning will disproportionately affect the lower income (relatively speaking!) of people in the north of the pike. Perhaps they feel their property taxes will be pushed to the point of having to sell. people have their own individual concerns and circumstances.. there is no one size fits all
@Peter Karg, I can refer you to my answer in this video of the 2017 Area Council candidate showcase, where I’m conveniently the first person to answer the first question in the first debate, about the charter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=181&v=NrjKrwqn6SM
I continue to be concerned about what work currently being done in City Council committees, and decisions voted on by elected representatives, would be transferred to staff or other bodies like the appointed Planning & Development Board (proposed to be the approving authority for so-called “small” developments of up to and including 20 units, in the now-deferred to 2020 draft new Zoning Code).
The Planning Department is already acquiring a lot of power, maybe more than people realize, from staff approvals of demolition requests for houses they deem insignificant, to recently, the City Council turning over authority to set parking rates to Barney Heath.
But I would change the “probably” in the video to yes, I would vote to put 8+8 on the ballot for a clean up or down popular vote, because 1) that’s what people seem to want to vote on and were promised, and would have happened with the mayoral veto as I recall, 2) it would preserve ward councilors and not reduce, but rather strengthen, the power of ward councilors, and 3) it would continue to guarantee equal representation for each ward, and 4) all races would be head to head, not pick two of three or four.
With that question on the ballot, there would be time for a good debate about how the council workload would change with a 16-member council. I might very well end up not voting for the charter change myself, but I think residents deserve the opportunity to vote on it.
Preach it Jack..preach it.
@Jack. I don’t really know who you are, but I have supported several affordable housing projects in Newton including the soon to be built Howard Haywood Senior affordable housing complex and the Engine 6 with Pine Street Inn. I was disappointed when the City did not select the Bnai Brith proposal for Austin Street and I’m still perplexed at how the developers wangled a 99 year lease of city property for less than a million dollars. That’s annual rent of less than $10,000. I also favor accessory apartments that are regulated and I absolutely do not fear low and moderate income folks moving into my neighborhood. I’m not scared of people that don’t look like me, \anymore than I was fearful that well regulated marijuana stores would bring hoards of drug addicts into Newton for a taste of the bewitching weed. Joanne and I are not looking for senior housing in Newton because we see far far better opportunities for what we need and can afford outside this City. We have been paying property taxes at our current address since the mid 1960s. We’re a real bargain in terms of what we pay the City versus what we get in return. Virtually all the City services we benefit from (trash pickup, snow removal etc) would have to be provided for our address whether we lived here or a family with 6 kids moved in. We volunteer a lot of time to this City that family heads with kids just don’t have the time for in the insanely stressful society we currently are stuck in. We’ve been happy to pay these taxes because we once went to these same schools. Our main gripe is that the big developers seem to wind up getting pretty much what they wanted to begin with. They may inflate the size and number of units upward at the start, but that’s only to get it to where they wanted it all along. This game isn’t unique to Newton. It’s played throughout the country . Riverside and Northland are simply too big and the process for approval is happening too quickly. All the consultant reports and Power Point presentations won’t convince me otherwise.
Yes, what Jack said.
See also: Liberal America’s Single-Family Hypocrisy
Good luck Julia! I’m glad you are running.
@Chuck. This study was fascinating, but it came as no surprise to me or to anyone who has even just lightly scratched the surface of local government dynamics in Newton or elsewhere. Older folks are obviously more engaged in local elections than younger people, but I don’t think there is any single reason for this. I do wish the study had examined the most corrosive aspect of today’s politics which is the obvious fact that the term “citizen” has lost the passion it once had. I know I’m generalizing, but somewhere along the line, too many Americans (probably most) began to think of themselves first as self interested consumers and not as citizens of a nation or community. I’m not talking about false and inflated displays of “patriotism”, jingoism or other such nonsense. My only reference is the Newton I grew up in the 1940s and 50s.
Older people like me grew up at a time when the prospect of voting and civic engagement to make government work for the common good were real motivators for how many of us acted and set our own professional priorities. This is why we do what we do every primary and general election day. It’s also why older African Americans cast votes hugely disproportionate to the rest of the African American population. They know how painful it was to get that vote and how quickly it can be lost.
@ Julia Malakie,
The 8+8 is “what people seemed to want to vote on”…
Roughly 20% of Newton voters want to maintain a 24-member city council. So 47% supported the proposed charter and only 33% want a smaller city council but didn’t support the charter proposal.
It’s hard to know what % of 2017’s Yes voters would vote for 8-8 that would “strengthen the power of the ward voters”, i.e. reduce our own power as voters as we increase the % of councilors who don’t answer tous. But you’d need a large majority of them, while I suspect that a large majority of them would instead oppose the unintended consequences. In Newton, all people of color who have held public office have served at-large, so an 8-8 council would make it harder for POC to hold office. And if you’re still buying the ruse that ward seats are cheaper, spend a little time on the OCPF database. https://www.ocpf.us/Filers/Index
We need to put something in front of voters that will pass, because we probably have one more shot before people give up and we’re doomed to having 24 for the next 120 years. And a “No on 8-8” campaign would have the easy task of educating voters about how that configuration would be detrimental to Newton, leading to another failure.
The point is, we need to put a proposal in front of voters that will give us a modern, best-practices city council that strengthens our democracy *given our specific demographics and characteristics* (i.e. please don’t anyone start ranting about Lowell, whose city council format is not comparable to the charter proposal in any way). A 16-member city council is not that.
@BobBurke I think you are making my point for me when you state that you have supported Julia Malakie in the past and will do so again unequivocally.
Where in any of what Julia wrote would make you think that Bernie Sanders and Our Revolution would support her views? She is clear and concise but these are protectionist, conservative views, not Progressive. Point to something and relate it back to Bernie’s message of equality for all. Please…
And before people scream bloody murder this is not about Julia’s views and whether I like them or not. She has stated her views clearly and it is our right to agree or disagree with her by voting in the election – clarity is something we can all appreciate in a politician.
My post was about people who are Bernie Sanders followers but are conservative when it comes to our town. Seems strange and unnatural to me.
“I don’t really know who you are? Besides the fact that I’ve introduced myself on V14, a while back. My extended family owns a house in the Highlands and we met during the Highlands Historic District debacle when my family tried speaking with you and Brian Yates regarding our concerns about being able to maintain an older house on a budget if ever deemed historic. And as you can guess, these concerns were promptly dismissed. There was zero discussion on how Historic Districts would affect current individual homeowners let alone how Historic districts may impact those, especially people of color, trying to purchase in the community in the future – intended AND unintended consequences.
Me? I’m still flummoxed and frustrated by the number of Newtonian’s who act liberal on the national level but yet are so conservative here locally. I guess it must be a generational thing. – John Morris aka Jack
Whoa, Jack!
I find Bernie Sanders and Julia’s Malakie views perfectly in sync.
Both are , it would seem , in favor of regulation and control of big money issues, and that would go to the heart of massive real estate development, and local “big money “ Mc Mansion real estate developers. Both Oligarchs and local “ meat on the bone” developers, need more regulation ( more restrictive zoning or “Historic Districts “? ), that “ local progressive “ minds don’t seem to agree with.
Blueprintbill said:
> Both Oligarchs and local “ meat on the bone” developers, need more regulation ( more restrictive zoning or “Historic Districts “? ), that “ local progressive “ minds don’t seem to agree with.
And ironically, the city-wide and Washington-specific zoning drafts have specific approaches to deal with “massive real estate development” and “Mc Mansions”. It’s just easier to get people riled up about hypothetically-tall buildings than it is to try and understand the approach.
Examples: new zoning drafts allow larger as-of-right construction. Why? To allow current owners to make money on their existing land without selling out to a large-parcel developer. Or the provisions of zoning that encourage variations in floor height to build non-monotonous buildings. Or changes in residential zoning to attempt to influence teardowns and the shape of new residential development.
Bigger picture: I want my Councilors to understand the strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of the proposals put together by staff and hired consultants and work to make them better. To treat staff (heck, everyone!) with respect. To educate the public, get them involved, and work to fight misperception and and fear (and definitely not encourage it). To bring different ideas together, not because there’s necessarily a perfect solution but because we do better when we at least understand each other.
I want a Councilor who won’t pigeonhole me, who knows everyone can have a good idea (and a bad one!), and that we can leave meetings feeling better even when we still haven’t fully agreed. Someone who won’t be afraid to face a future that’s different, because there’s a whole lot in Newton that could be better. Someone who can look beyond hyperbole and bluster and see root problems that we can work to fix. Who takes the time to figure out why people they disagree are saying what they are saying. Someone who is respected for their approach even more than they are known for their stances.
Doesn’t really seem so much to ask, really.
Mike Halle just said about everything I was thinking while reading this thread.
I just want to point out that when a special permit proposal comes before the city council, such as a large (or small) development, councilors become a judicial body working within a quasi-judicial process and are not to represent the views of their constituency as they normally do. They are to deliberate and vote on the specifics of the proposal itself following the rules set up for such a process. Sometimes some councilors do not follow those rules.
For this reason I look for candidates that do not have a personal agenda for or against development or other policies. I cannot vote for or against Julia but knowing her personal agenda concerning development, I’m not sure she would follow those rules.
As a Ward 3 councilor, Julia would represent, hopefully, the wishes of a majority of her constituency, not just a special contingent she agrees with, during the normal duties of legislating. But when it comes to special permit proceedings will just vote on the merits of the proposal without being directed by her constituency. Can she do this?
I’m a member of the liberal, baby boom generation but believe a good dose of skepticism is necessary for getting things right. I’m not an ideologue whose beliefs tend to overshadow common sense. I believe in fact checking everything and interfering in blanket agreement over most things. I think our city councilors should delve into all of the parts of any proposal to find ways to make it the best fit possible for Newton.
I wouldn’t vote for an 8+8 division of Ward vs at large city council as I did not for an all at-large council. To reduce the size of the council, the ratio of Ward councilor and at-large should be maintained as it is now. That doesn’t reduce the council as much as some want but it decreases it from 24.
Mike Halle very nicely articulated concerns I share about the development conversation in Newton.
We clearly have some candidates and frequent V14 commenters who do our city no favor by encouraging fear and anger. Maybe it’s because they themselves have been fed a steady diet of fear and anger by others in our community and have simply bought into it. Or maybe it’s because, as Mike said, it’s easier to do than the hard work of understanding proposals on the table and having thoughtful dialog. Both are inexcusable.
I want my elected leaders to be deeply knowledgeable about critical issues of our day and options for addressing them. And to help educate those who are just living their busy lives and trusting their government to set us on the path for success in an ever-changing world.
City councilors shouldn’t pick and choose the constituents they plan to represent. They need to be committed to representing all the people in their ward. I’m not hearing that form Julia, whom I respect in many ways.
The 8-8 option was an idea concocted by a city council that no longer exists. A third of the council is new as of 2017, and it will have even fewer members who were part of the push for the 8-8 configuration after the 2019 election. When the new council considers the size and composition, it needs to do so with a thorough examination of a range of options. IMO, 8-8 is the worst possible configuration and I’d far prefer to remain with the unwieldy 24 councilors with the current ratio of ward/at large councilors.
@Jane,
I should imagine any appetite to amend the charter just got flushed down the drain. Mayor Fuller decided to not forward the home rule petition. http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/97168
Julia is being admonished to represent the interests or positions of everyone in Ward 3 regardless of her personal predilections and there’s been no shortage of statements by people who claim to have divined what these preferences are. To the best of my knowledge, no scientific polling of a specific development project has even been done in Newton. In Julia’s case, the only way we will have even the roughest guess of the preference of Ward 3 folks is by who gets elected to that seat.
To the best of my knowledge, no scientific polling of a specific development proposal has ever been done at the citywide level in Newton and certainly not within individual wards. I suspect a majority of people in Newton feel that the 3 major development proposals are too large and have the potential to leave variable unresolved (or even unsolvable) impacts on adjacent streets, transportation services, neighborhoods and city services. .
The overwhelming majority of those with concerns about these projects have done so respectfully and I get uneasy with suggestions that we have not.
Back to Julia again. It’s also quite possible that her electoral strength will transcend even these critical development related issues. Julia is a free spirit with one heck of a record in public service in Newton and beyond. And I suspect that Julia and her supporters (including me) will be enthusiastically talking these up in the months ahead.
In the Friday Packet is a report on the organics pilot, and possible next steps. http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/97321
I wish I’d been able to complete the survey referred to, because as I said above, I liked being in the pilot, and would like to see citywide organics collection succeed. Unfortunately the post-pilot survey was the worst survey I’ve ever tried to fill out, because if there was a question you didn’t want to answer (in my case, randomly rank-ordering a bunch of things I had no rankings for), you could not proceed to the next question. So I was not able to answer most questions or complete the survey, and it looks like it was quite interesting.
I also wish that instead of the administration pushing to spend $175,000 just to design a new Library parking lot in order to justify cutting trees for solar carports, plus as yet unknown hundreds of thousands of dollars more on construction, we were saving that money for startup costs of organics collection (the rodent-proof buckets).