As reported in yesterday’s post, at a meeting of the Newton City Council Public Safety and Transportation committee (PS&T), committee chair Councilor Jay Ciccone compared a proposal to implement variable priced parking to Jim Crow laws. After he made his comment, Councilor Ciccone was gently rebuked, giving him an opportunity to acknowledge that his comment was inappropriate and take it back. Instead, he further committed himself to the comparison. His words were not a mistake or slip.
Below is a transcript of the exchange between Councilor Ciccone and Councilor Brenda Noel. The exchange follows staff and committee discussion of the parking proposal and then Councilor Ciccone expressing two misgivings. The first was his concern about the potential for law suits. Expressing his concern, he drew the analogy to Rosa Parks and Jim Crow laws. HIs second concern was about giving city staff, rather than City Council, authority to raise meter rates. His comments run from 1:45:38 to 1:46:49 of the official audio.
As Councilor Ciccone prepared to open comment to the public, Councilor Noel questioned his comparison and Councilor Ciccone reaffirmed it.
I have made every attempt to transcribe accurately. I did not transcribe “uhs” and “ums” and the like. If I have made an error or errors, please let me know in the comments and I will update. At one point, Councilors Noel and Ciccone speak over each other. This exchange begins at 1:46:50 of the official audio.
Ciccone:
Those are just the two things that are concerning me about it. But, I’ll open it up to the public, again, one last time. If anybody’s got any questions, comments, concerns.
Unknown:
Brenda has her hand up.
Noel:
Mr. Chairman.
Ciccone:
Oh, Brenda. I’m sorry. Councilor Noel.
Noel:
I appreciate the point. And, no disrespect, but please do not compare dynamic parking to Rosa Parks’ experience.
Ciccone:
Well, what do you want … You give me a scenario then.
Noel:
It has nothing to do with Rosa Parks. So, please, don’t make that comparison.
Unknown:
You could say big house, little house.
Ciccone:
Yeah. I was comparing discrimination. And, I think that was a really good place to put it.
Noel:
I would be really cautious. I would be very cautious with the comments.
Ciccone:
Well that’s my preference and that’s what I’ve got on the record. So.
Anybody else want to speak on this?
There’s not much to add. Good for Councilor Noel for trying to hold Councilor Ciccone accountable for his comments. And, there should be no question that Councilor Ciccone’s words were intentional and reflect his (poor) understanding of parking regulations and the historical injustice of Jim Crow discrimination.
We’re left with just one question: why, given his racially insensitive (at best) comments and his refusal to disavow them, is Councilor Ciccone still Council President Marc Laredo’s choice for the honor and privilege to chair a council standing committee?
Next: why we won’t get an answer to that question.
Did this “incident” really need a whole new thread?
You’re blowing this way out of proportion.
Good for Councilor Noel.
Sean Roche, you are turning this blog into a cesspit of bile and vitriol.
So is he that male councilor who addresses female colleagues by first name?
Councilor Noel’s actions and Sean’s actions are separate and distinct. Councilor Noel approached the situation clearly, but with respect. Sean’s tone was condescending and one has to wonder if he would have spoken about other councilors in a similar manner. If he continues to demean the Ward 1 councilor with yet another thread as he alludes his plan to, we’ll have an answer to that question.
What Ciccone said really wasn’t acceptable, but I find Sean’s handling of this in extraordinarily poor taste: he makes a provocative post, people comment, and instead of responding to other people’s comments he creates a new post. And people have been commenting here, but Sean hasn’t addressed any of these comments. (Yet we know he’s been on V14 because he’s commented on other posts)
MMQC, funny how that works. Nobody is under any obligation to respond to comments.
Jane, “all due respect” is often code for just the opposite. Councilor Noel has to work with this guy and there is at least some protocol involved, but good for her for choosing to make a direct and professional response. It’s sad that Councilor Ciccone doesn’t even seem to comprehend why what he said was offensive, nor does he mind that he offended people. As for constituents, he needs to earn our respect. There’s plenty of reason for people in Ward 1 through 8 to be outraged.
Obviously he’s not obligated. I never said that. The Adam-Greg-Chuck-Sean clique on this blog has an affinity for purposely misrepresenting people’s comments. What I did say was that his behavior is in poor taste and it absolutely is, but it’s pretty standard for his consistently antagonistic online behavior. And I say this as someone who found Ciccone’s comments really gross.
I think Councilor Ciccone was trying to explain that discrimination comes in many forms. (Racial, ethnic, religious, & income/class, etc…) And to prove his point, he compared this new parking measure with one of the more famous examples of discrimination in recent American history.
@Tarik Lucas: So do you think it was an appropriate metaphor?
@Chuck: I think how it works is if Mary Mary Quite Contrary thinks you’re in a group, you’re in a group.
Wow. Obnoxious, but amusing. I’ve never been accused of being in a clique before. Everyone can see exactly what you said. I’ll let your comments stand on their own.
I’m aware that everyone can see what I said, this being a public blog and all. But there is absolutely a groupthink mentality among the four of you.
Adam- I didn’t use the phrase you attribute to me and it’s not a phrase I would use for the reasons you stated.
Funny, I didn’t even add any commentary to this post but am being accused of groupthink. I’m not quite sure how that works.
Jane, I did not attribute the term “due respect” to you. I might have inaccurately quoted or paraphrased Councilor Noel, but I think the same general thinking applies.
Councilor Noel,
Thanks for your on-the-point comments about Councilor Ciccone’s metaphor and for your service to Newton. You’re doing an amazing job and keep up the great work.
Shawn
@ Greg-
I do think it was an appropriate metaphor. And the fact that we are now talking about parking regulations and how it might affect the less affluent, is an important conversation to have.
Here goes a question to anyone: Assuming Newton adopts new parking regulations, will the nominal amount of the parking violations be greater during “peak periods” or in village centers compared to other parts of Newton?
I was there that night with Sean. I think we might have been some of the only residents in the room. I regret not asking to make a comment in support of Councilor Noel’s comment. She was professional and to the point.
Thank you Councilor Noel for consistently saying what needs to be said even when it is difficult. Councilor Ciccone is from my ward and is expected to be a leader in our community. I appreciate that Councilor Noel is speaking the truth about Councilor Ciccone’s remarks. What troubles me the most is even after its been expressed to Councilor Ciccone that his comparison inappropriate and offensive, he has stuck by it. As his constituent, I hope he will reconsider his response and learn from his insensitive comments.
I think Councilor Ciccone’s comparison was ridiculous and inappropriate, and the fact that he chose to stand by it tells me that the persecution complex among some people in Newton borders on the absurd.
That said, I’m not a fan of the dynamic parking proposals. That anyone who shows up can take any available space in, say, Newton Center is one of the few remaining democratic things in our society. I don’t believe we have parking or traffic problems anywhere in Newton that justify a conscious decision by the municipal government to create a two-tiered system based on ability to pay. It sends the message to families struggling to get by on the AMI that those fun village centers we’re trying to improve, not for you.
I’d be all for sky-high parking prices if we had a functional way for families with very young children, senior citizens, the disabled, etc., to get around Newton without driving. Right now we don’t, and I’m not in favor of “punishing” people for driving when they’re not given any reasonable alternative.
Appropriate comment or not, Sean’s reaction with more than one post on the comment is approaching an absurd overreaction. Like a dog with a bone, he simply cannot let go and move on.
Variable parking rates do discriminate against those who cannot pay the higher prices and including some seniors, some disabled who do not have a disabled tag, families with young children, etc. That was obviously Councilor Ciccone’s message. You can recognize his insensitivity without dismissing his message.
With Newton having a large discrepancy between those residents who are extremely wealthy and those who struggle to make ends meet, variable priced parking is plainly discriminatory. Even though it’s not legally prohibited or protected by civil rights laws, it should be against what Newton stands for.
MMQC is not alone in seeing that whatever Sean, Adam, Chuck or Greg support – the others support too – right or wrong. She just had the courage to say it.
Tarik Lucas is new to V14, Welcome. I for one enjoy his refreshing take on issues and his ability to flesh out what is and what isn’t a big deal. Maybe you four should listen to him.
Councilor Noel, as usual, handled things appropriately.
Alicia, please clarify what you meant by saying you and Sean “might have been the only residents in the room?” All the others were from outside Newton?