Organizers of Saturday’s Porch Fest and at least some of their hosts are peeved that the anti-development group RightSize Riverside have been trying to politicize the event. Here’s an email organizers sent today.
Dear PorchFest hosts:
You may have received “RightSize Riverside” flyers this afternoon with a note encouraging you to distribute them at PorchFest.We did not provide your contact information to the RightSize Riverside organization! It appears as if the Right Size Riverside obtained the addresses of all PorchFest hosts from the published map and brochure and elected to drop off flyers without our approval.We feel very strongly that PorchFest is all about music and community. We received several requests for political, social and other displays and declined them all. Please also note that your contact information is kept completely private, other than distributing it to the musicians to coordinate logistics.You are, of course, free to do whatever you’d like with the flyers, but the distribution was definitely not part of the festival and not authorized.The weather looks great, have a wonderful time and post pictures!Newton PorchFest 2019 Committee
I bet the Right Size Newton team will be equally peeved that the anonymous person who posted this is attempting to label Right Size as an “anti-development group”!
They’re welcome to be peeved but that’s what they are Simon. They’re against development.
They may position themselves as wanting a smaller project but that’s a ruse because it has been established that a project at the size they’re advocating for is not financially feasible.
Greg, I’ve not been following Northland that closely. Im assuming Northland has had ownership of the land for a while. It seems to me they’ve deliberately run the place down. If whatever Right Size is advocating for is not financially feasible, then perhaps the development is in the wrong place.
I suspect some of our politicians and challengers will be canvassing this weekend too
Greg,
Could you comment on this document from the City? Being against the % of growth concentrated in a small subset of Newton could be considered “common sense”
Are the numbers really as large as they suggest?
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/97290/05-28-19%20Zoning%20&%20Planning%20Agenda%20w%20memos.pdf
To summarize:
If I’m reading the summary table correctly (please correct if I’m wrong)
I think the ‘existing’ is just the number of people living along Washington street?
over 20 years…
– existing population: 1031, NEW population: 5000 to 6000
-existing public school population: 184, NEW students: 900 to 1000
– commuter rail will still NOT run frequently
– 7% increase in Newton population (88k) CONCENTRATED ONLY along just Washington street??? Am I reading this report correctly??? I must be reading it wrong
The summary of the Washington St study above starts at Page 15
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/97290/05-28-19%20Zoning%20&%20Planning%20Agenda%20w%20memos.pdf
Seems that I wasn’t paying attention and was talking Riverside. That Vision Plan is worthless. Whilst viability should be part of equation, factoring in past costs is just wrong. It’s hardly “Sustainable” to tear down and move a hotel merely for access. The vision plan should have used assessed value of the land in question. Instead it tries to bail out the owners.
Porchfest will be a wonderful opportunity to inform
residents about Riverside. The public will be well served.
I think this is the proverbial “tempest in a teapot” unless I see some evidence that the Right Size folks were intimidating, harassing or disrupting homeowners or the group organizing the event.
A case in point was how we didn’t overreact to a group of activists who, in essence, crashed an event I was involved with. Exactly four years ago, we held our first citywide organizing event for Bernie Sanders at the West Newton Theater. The event drew more than 150 people. We were a bit surprised when several people showed up inside the lobby and outside on the street in an attempt to persuade attendees to get behind the YES position on Ballot Question 1 that would go to voters the following election cycle. They never asked any of us if it would be okay to leaflet and lobby which I’m certain I would have done in deference to a group that had paid rent for the use of the theater.
Even worse, they inferred to attendees that Bernie and the organizers of the West Newton event (I suppose that also included me) would be YES on Question 1. The fact of the matter was that I was not in favor of eliminating ward councilors and I can state with some certainty that most of Bernie’s other organizers in Newton were not in favor of eliminating ward councilors as well.
Still, we shrugged it off, shook hands with the YES folks and held a great rally and organizing session for a campaign that would go so much further than any of us could have anticipated at the time. I rather suspect that Saturday’s “Porchfest” will not suffer as a result of this incident and I hope to get to at least one of today’s events. Things like this are what makes Newton so great, but so is the capacity of villages and neighborhoods to have their concerns voiced and considered.
@ Simon
Greg has a financial conflict of interest. I don’t know why people consider him to be an unbiased member engaging in these debates- he’s not. “Anti” is a blatant attempt to diminish another group, and we shouldn’t be innocently asking why. His job is to advocate for certain positions, even if most people in the city don’t want them. He’s paid to help businesses, not his fellow citizens. That’s what lobbyists do. Shame on us for not calling him out more consistently.
@bugek I can’t believe people pay money for crystal ball extrapolation like Figure 5. You know what the odds are of that being accurate to any degree? 0.0 . And I love the straight lines. At least they didn’t make the predictions non linear.
Such trash. Prediction is hard, especially about the future.
At least it’s a pdf and no trees were harmed in the making of it.
It’s ironic that those who want large mixed use developments all over the place are so found of Porchfest. I suppose someday a child will say, “mommy, what’s a porch?”
Paul,
I believe Greg’s only omission is to put a disclaimer with each post. “Greg Reibman is a paid employee of the Newton Chamber of Commerce, the opinions expressed in this post are his own”
Any casual/new readers would have absolutely no idea, let people decide… I know that If I read a opinion piece by a paid employee of the NRA regarding guns, I would take it with a GIGANTIC gain of salt. People deserve to know if there is a conflict of interest
@bugek you’re reading the table correctly. The number of units predicted can ( I assume ) be extrapolated more accurately based on existing developer proposals.
How the get the number of new jobs is a bit more fishy.
The economic forecast is completely tell them something they want to hear.
Especially with retail being hammered by Amazon and everything but high end boutique retail getting squeezed by online shopping.
It’s hard to figure what all the retail is going to be. The developers are be better off with just housing, but the “mixed use” cult has to force their vision onto everyone, including the developers.
Greg has opinions. So what? We all have opinions. That’s why we’re here on Village 14. There’s no conflict of interest on Greg’s part simply because he supports development. He’s not an elected official. He’s not hiding the fact he runs the Chamber of Commerce. Greg is just doing the same thing we all do… using his own life experiences and his own perspective to form opinions that he articulates here. I’d like folks to stop attacking his integrity, because it’s really baseless and unfair.
@Rich – the squeeze of Newton retail predates Amazon and has been driven by soaring rents. Didn’t used to have a lot more small businesses that weren’t fancy when I moved in 20 some odd years ago. Too many of them closed, as well as many restaurants, because of unaffordable rents.
Mike,
The difference is that Greg can ‘create’ topics and we can only comment. The casual reader has no idea he is the president of the Newton Chamber of Commerce. he is not hiding it, but he is not disclosing it to new readers either
Ironic to be called out for not being transparent by anonymous commentators. How do we know what conflicts they may have?
What I do for a living is hardly a secret here.
I did not see flyers at any of the PorchFest houses I visited in Lower Falls. I also did not hear anyone talking about development. The hosts and guests were friendly and sociable and the music was excellent. Some of the hosts said that more people showed up than they expected, so, as far as I can tell, the event was a success.
@simon wrote “I bet the Right Size Newton team will be equally peeved that the anonymous person who posted this is attempting to label Right Size as an “anti-development group”!”
Inside of our Newton bubble we can call it whatever we want. Right Size Newton can say that it’s for smart development, or more dispersed development, or whatever. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t seen for who we are by those who would be our future neighbors. When I talk with younger renters or owners in places like Allston, Cambridge, and Somerville, they will specifically reference things like this as “NIMBY bullshit.” Those words come from them directly. Do you really think they’re going to want to move to this community when they view us that way?
But I also point to this article from CityLab (https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/05/connecticut-affordable-housing-zoning-westport/590155/) about Westport, CT. A developer bought 2 acres and proposed a relatively dense housing development, albeit much smaller than what’s being proposed for Newton. People came out to the planning meetings with signs, criticizing it for being too big and too dense. Each time the developer offered concessions the critics groaned, until it now has just a few, very expensive houses built on it.
Sound familiar?
Said one Planning and Zoning Commissioner, who voted against it: “To me, it’s too much density. It’s putting too much in a little area. To me, this is ghettoizing Westport.”
So is Right Size Newton anti-development? Lop off the “ghettoizing” line and this is the same thing said here.
Chuck,
Are you also employed by the Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce? genuinely curious. Of course, I’m sure your personal opinions align with your professional opinions. I, on the other hand am employed by a global tech company in the financial sector which has zero interest of Density in Newton
@Bugek, your surely having a giggle!
https://www.n2innovationdistrict.com/about/staff
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/planning/lrplan/econdev/commission.asp
Currently, yes. I also live in Ward 3 and my support for increased density and transit options predate my time working for the Chamber. I started working in economic development BECAUSE I believe this is the right way for the city to go.
I remember the number of unquie vistors to this site is in the 10s of thousands… so many new visitors
If a moderator created a post about school safety, teacher pay, preserving trees over development I’m sure everyone would agree that the moderator should disclose if they are an employee/lobbyist for the NRA, teachers union, green party.. simply because the post could omit key facts, downplay negatives, use different statistical numbers to boost their agenda…
Since adding a disclaimer appears to be too much effort (or they feel its pointless)…
Will I get banned if i add a comment to every post(not comment) that the poster is “the president (or paid employees) of the newton needham chambers of commerce, but the opinions are strictly their own)??
Let people decide if they want to scrutinize the post .. i think its fair to inform and let ppl decide since we have 10s of thousands of vistors…
What is the argument against tranparancy?
I think what RightSize advocates is morally bankrupt and perpetuates social, economic, and environmental injustice.
That said, community events are exactly the right place to advocate on community issues.
Carry on.
@bugek and @simon, I’m glad to let people decide on the credibility of posters here… and they should… care to share your first and last names so we can apply this standard across the board?
@Chuck Tanowitz – I suggest that you also request the names of their employers. After all, their jobs may present a conflict of interest. Indeed, what is the argument against transparency? I work at BU, and don’t believe I have a COI on the subjects of development or community events, but on the other hand, I am anti-anti-development, which makes my opinions subject to scrutiny.
Chuck,
I easily create throw out a valid name and address. Unless you stalk the address and demand a photo, you won’t know if it real.
The standards are much higher for moderators who can create posts, set agenda and overall tone (delete comments)… so will I get banned if I add a single comment to each pro-development posting written by a Newton/Neeedham Chamber of Commerce?
It will simply state “The above post was created by president|director|employee of the Newton/Needham Chamber of commerce whose job is to lobby for big and small businesses, but the views are soley their own. Decide for yourself if there is a conflict on interest”
will I get banned? happy to add transparency…
Is wanting a say about a 10-year construction project that could have a dramatic impact on your community and quality of life anti-development?
How does someone gain the right to post on Village14, not just comment?
What Matt said. Waiting to hear………hello?