What happened to SUNSHINE in our local government?
The Newton League of Women Voters recently issued a complaint to the city government concerning the apparent lack of transparency and deliberation in the decision making process involved with changing electeds pay structure, including not addressing problems brought to them by the Blue Ribbon Commission.
When we talk about process, we mean how our city government goes about making decisions.
Thank you to the NLWV for publicly making a strong statement about decision-making processes being used within our city government. It is greatly appreciated as it pertains not only to changing the pay structure for elected officials but also to many other decisions made by both the legislative and executive branches of our city government.
What seemed most important to the committee during its discussion was the time frame …
The rushing of varied, city changing, wide-ranging decisions, such as this one, including making them over the summer – when a large number of interested Newtonites are not in Newton – has been an evolving problem for the last few years.
However, it appears that the rush to vote in time for the City Council to see a pay raise in January outweighs the need for transparency and deliberation.
Lack of proper deliberation and transparency on many issues facing our city has become the norm. Without a paper of record or Newton assigned editor or reporter, only those issues, in which either residents are informed early through other sources and are actively seeking answers from the city or large numbers of city councilors have differing ideas on an issue before them, are deliberated as they should be with public participation. Even then, many decisions are made on the inside regardless of problems pointed out by city paid studies, city contracted consultants, various appointed commissions, and by resident input. These include, but are not limited to, such varied things as zoning changes, Washington Street, labor negotiations, outsourcing, parking and its pay structure, the arbitrary overnight parking ban, the size of the city council and now the pay structure of the mayor, city councilors and school committee members.
City elections are meant to be non-issue related and non-partisan. Local elected officials are expected to work with other electeds, residents of the city and city employees to come to conclusions about a vote. These statements are no longer true. Candidates are asked to run and elected either because of how they will vote on one or just a few issues, how progressive they appear and their activism on certain issues.
Looking more and more like how our national partisan government operates and identity politics.
Thoughts? Solutions?
In the past, one issue candidates rarely won at-large elections in particular. I don’t see it as a good campaign strategy. However, this year could be different. This is the first election with virtually no local coverage. 2017 was bad, but the situation has only gotten worse.
I worry about one issue candidates making decisions about the wide variety of issues the city council deals with.
@Marti: I agree with you in general. The lack of media coverage is a danger to every democracy. At first, we’ve devolved from missing investigative reporting to now just missing having reporters explain what’s happening.
I do disagree with two of your examples.
One, it’s unrealistic to expect a lot of public deliberation during labor negotiations.
And, second, it’s inaccurate to say the city hasn’t provided “proper deliberation and transparency” regarding zoning reform in general and Washington Street in particular. Those meetings and deliberations have been going on for years (and how could “Hello Washington Street” have been more inclusive?) Unfortunately zoning is the driest of dry topics. The vast majority of people don’t really follow it, unless and until they think it will directly impact them (or get some fear mongering email saying something is about to be “shoved down their throats”).
Zoning reform has been anything but a secret. And we still have many months to go before it even comes up for a vote.
I was talking recently with someone about the City Council discussion of salary increases for elected officials, and they mentioned the lack of meeting notes as an issue making it extremely difficult to keep up-to-date on what our local government is doing. Someone who couldn’t attend a meeting would now have to spend that same amount of time listening to the audio version. I know that I have rarely listened to the audio and rely on friends who attend to fill me in. This gets to the lack of independent reporting…
I’m not sure the City Councilors see their lack of transparency, btw. To them, they will have held two public hearings on raises (the one last week and one the first week of September) before they vote. To me, the hearings are window dressing, since there is no proposal on the table (having tossed out the BRC recommendations) and it’s not clear what they will propose and what the full financial effects are to the City. Not to mention their meetings have been over the summer or right after Labor Day, when many people are not paying attention and are not even in Newton.
I just worry that the raises will be voted in, the new City employee contracts will be agreed to, there will be cuts somewhere to pay for salary increases, and people will wonder how it all happened without them knowing.
I should add that I’m actually not opposed to increases…I’m actually kinda on the fence about it. It’s been a long time since our elected officials (including School Committee members) saw a raise. But the process just doesn’t feel right…the timing is off. If the BRC has started a year earlier, there wouldn’t have been the rush to meet the September 30th ‘deadline’.
I think there’s a lot of public polarization and factionalism around major complex issues in Newton like zoning and development, but that polarization reaches down into a lot of more bread-and-butter issues as well. My suspicion is that strident public voices make it more difficult to get day-to-day work of the City done, and that a natural response to that is to get some of that work done through quiet internal discussion and compromise based on best judgement at hand.
Unfortunately, that means that the city fails to fully benefit from the many constructive and thoughtful ideas from people in our community who are willing to contribute to the discussion. The best choices don’t get made, resulting in some unintended consequences. People get angry. Distrust gets worse, not better. Then it’s no longer enjoyable to be helping out your city. Leaders and staff can become “gun shy”, afraid to propose a big ideas or a vision that might offend or not work out.
That’s too bad, because Newton could use some bold ideas.
A large Council, I think, doesn’t make things better. It diffuses accountability and dilutes vision, while at the same time leaving Councilors exposed to attacks for making compromises that don’t sit well with single-issue voters.
This isn’t just Newton, it’s everywhere. But we have to find a way out of this spiral. We have to find a way to trust more. Forgive more. Worry less. Debate with passion, teach and learn with each other, understand each other, help each other, and at the end of the day be closer to each other. Acknowledge hard work and good intentions. Civic work is noble work.
I actually don’t want to have to follow every issue I care about closely. I want leaders who will make good choices for good reasons based on a vision they can explain, even on difficult issues, and even if I don’t agree with them. Transparency is just the necessary insurance policy on top of the process.
Maybe that’s all too idealistic, but perhaps that’s something missing nowadays.
There is no balanced voting on the city council.
Important issues like the new budget which saw an historical
large increase from $412 million to $496. million. are passed
with minimal oversight.
The Newton City Council is weak and seldom makes well thought
through decisions. A significantly large number of council members vote according to their group identification.
This means very poor democratic representation. We have very few lawyers now. Instead many councilors vote without a good understanding of the law and the unintended consequences of their vote. A handful of councilors are in control of all the votes taken on key issues.
I assume most readers here realize that facts aren’t particularly important to Colleen. While she states that the city budget went from $412 million to $496 million, Newton’s operating budget actually went up to $430m. The $496 million includes water, sewer, stormwater and CPA funds that are generally looked at separately.
@Sue: Was the person complaining that the City Council Committee Reports on this topic did not contain enough information or that the Blue Ribbon Commission Reports did not contain enough information? I’ve certainly done my best to include all the reports that have been posted online in my e-newsletter and on my website: http://www.amysangiolo.com.
@Sue – The City Council has just recently had a large staff change. Karyn Dean after many years in the clerk’s office now works for the Law Department. Shawna Sullivan has left for a new job in DPW.
In response, Nadia Khan has been promoted to Shawna’s job and two Clerk staff were promoted into the two council clerk positions. Without fail, minutes from a meeting appear in the Friday packet just before the next Council meeting. As long as I’ve been on the Council that has been the standard.
Our two new staff need a little space. My clerk Donna Whitman had her first Zoning and Planning meeting in the Chamber and it went to 11 pm and was complicated with a lot going on. She is working on the report and has just sent me a draft. She also has the Program’s and Services Committee – which explains why the minutes for that Committee have not yet been posted.
I stand on the record of our clerks to get minutes posted. Please bear with us while we let our two new clerk’s climb the learning ladder. We will be back up to speed soon.
@Susan – are there minutes available for the actual City Council meetings, or just the committee meetings? I always thought there were only audio recordings of the actual meetings, which I don’t find useful at all.
Amy – kudos for your diligence at posting all those reports. It’s not your job, however, to make sure the public gets all the reports the city posts. It’s the city’s. And as a previous poster noted, one shouldn’t have to listen to the entire audio to find out what happens at any given meeting. So the answer would seem to be no.
That is, yes.
So if you are well-educated in the process of how city government works, it might be possible to find the meeting notes for committees. But if you are only slightly familiar, it is not easy. Looking at the City Council page for the Programs & Services Committee, there are sometimes ‘reports’ posted and sometimes not. My own experience when searching on the City website has not been very positive over the years, and it can become frustrating and a barrier. I totally understand that the notes from all these meetings take time to produce (especially when the meetings are so long!), and unfortunately sometimes the argument has already moved on by the time they are available.
I appreciate that Amy posts notes ( I did the same for all the Charter Commission meetings), but you have to know where to look.
This all goes back to the original discussion–transparency requires a lot more work nowadays. The lack of an independent press means that individuals and groups try to bring ‘sunshine’ to issues, but we are only volunteers. The SOP of our city government has not changed all that much to pick up the slack.
I don’t think one can say the city lacks transparency when it has a website that includes minutes to every possible meeting, with the exception of the full council meetings and school committee meetings which you can watch on NewTV. At what point, is it citizens’ responsibility to learn what’s going on in the city?
If an issue is important to me, then I follow it closely. A huge swath of what the city council does isn’t that important to me and that’s fine. They should do their work and we should let them.
As for salaries, a clear job description is in order. This is NOT a full time position. If certain councilors choose to make it one, or close to one, that’s their choice. A job description would, however, justify a modest increase in their salary.
As for the city employee salaries. Please do not conflate the salary of employees for whom their city position is appointed, not elected. Those salaries are negotiated and it should be noted that Newton has a terrible reputation for settling contracts in a timely manner. While the specifics of the negotiations aren’t public, it is public knowledge that this city has difficulty settling contracts and should be a concern to citizens.
I actually want to clarify my last post…I think parts of our city government have changed their standard operating procedures. I now get a newsletter that goes to all dog owners and emails from the Mayor’s office. My husband likes the new trash and recycling app. And of course, there is 311. But it feels like the City Council is struggling. I see some City Councilors have newsletters, but I can’t think of anything comprehensive or official, other than what they’ve done for a long time. Is there anything else?
@Sue Flicop – are you signed up to receive the weekly City Council email from the clerk? It includes notices on all council meetings in the upcoming week, docket items being discussed, etc. Sign up is here (right side of the page, about halfway down).
@Andrea – the answer is yes. Let me address the process.
1. The committee reports all contain the minutes of every item discussed in committee as well as the vote on that item.
2. The “Reports Docket” which is what is used to organize our full council meetings – essentially it is our agenda, contains a summary of every item from every report – the docket number, the item itself, the vote. This Reports docket constitutes what the council calls First Call votes.
3. Unless an item is put on “second call” all the first call items are voted as a group. there is no further discussion at the council meeting for all first call items
4. All the items put on second call are discussed by the full council one at a time. There is a report of all 2nd call items, a summary of the discussion and the outcome which is sometimes a vote, sometimes a postponement to a date certain, sometimes the item is sent back to committee and sometimes the item is chartered (which means that all conversation stops and it will be taken up again at the next meeting)
The agendas and reports are found here:
http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/aldermen/meetings/2019.asp
And thanks, Allison. I too was going to add the link for the Council’s newsletter. If you sign up you will receive a weekly newsletter that will tell you what is on the docket for each committee and information on full council actions. We have been doing that for 3 approaching 4 years. We have been working hard to make sure citizens have access to our activities.
It would also be nice to have a followup newsletter about the docketed items. Often I see that something is on the docket and then I have no idea how things played out that night. For instance, my family is one that is affected by the overnight parking ban and a few weeks ago I saw that something had been docketed, but then that was it – I never knew the outcome. I asked on V14 and Greg knew what happened and was able to provide me with an answer.
@Susan – I followed the link and cannot find the second call discussions. Could you please provide a link to an example? Thanks!!
Thanks for the link…I see it now on the City Council home page. didn’t bother to scroll all the way down past pictures of City Councilors. I’m interested to see what’s in the email.
@marymary – there were 2 docketed items on the winter parking ban. One of them was approved by the public safety committee and got stuck in the full council – it was postponed. I tried to bring it back this summer but it was postponed again until our first meeting in September. I hope that it will pass in September and will shorten the time of the winter ban. The second item is stuck in the public safety committee. There is no agreement that there should be a pilot in parts of wards 2 and 3. Andrea Kelley and I continue to work with the Chief of police who seems to be willing to try a pilot. Then we have to see if the councilors are willing to try it.
@andrea. This isn’t very iteresting but there were several 2nd call votes in this document. The second call items are at the top. http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/97991/07-08-19%20Council%20Actions.pdf
Thank you, Susan. Susan, the reports really just tell us what happened and that there was a discussion, but for any detail of the discussion and who said what, we need to listen to the recordings or go to the meetings? There aren’t actual minutes of the meetings, like there is for School Committee?
Greg,
(Sorry I have been temporarily MIA.)
Creating a Master Plan for the city and village centers is to be applauded. Washington Street and Newtonville residents in particular have long requested a plan be made – as has been promised in the Comprehensive Plan and retained as it has evolved. The Comprehensive Plan is necessarily vague leaving it open for interpretation and misuse.
The process wasn’t transparent from the beginning with the rushed contracting of the Principal Group without issuing a Request For Interest (RFI) and then for bids. The city council granted the mayor’s request for $500,00 to fund the contract – all in the dark. Standard practices are there for many important reasons which have been discussed thoroughly elsewhere but most importantly residents read the RFI to be informed of the mayor’s vision.
The Principal Group itself has turned out to be experts in what they do and more than likely would have been selected if the proper procedures were followed. It would be reasonable to inform residents first about PG’s vast experience working with cities and towns and their residents to become more beautiful, livable, walkable and user friendly. They use “big ideas” for towns to save the past and be a part of the future. With such info, it would be understandable to move quickly under certain conditions – such as their availability.
The Principal Group’s process has been as inclusive as it could be. The major problem is when their report was issued in May, their conclusions, recommendations and advice have been largely ignored in practice.
From a small part of PG’s report,
I know labor negotiations are private and probably could have left those specific words out. I’m speaking more generally about the School Committee decisions that are affected by them.
@Marti—with respect, the April 22 draft zoning for Washington Street includes all of what you cite from the Principal Group’s report. The Council’s Zoning and Planning Committee has been working on the Washington Street Vision (which is where a lot of public input happening now), which is a necessary precursor to passing the zoning. Outside of building heights, I think Zoning and Planning is now mostly at a point of consensus on the Vision. A public hearing on it will be held in September, and then I expect it will be revised and voted…. and then, perhaps, we will get to the zoning.
Andreae, thank you.
Yes, the vision statement is now part of the comprehensive plan for the city – that’s what I was quoting.
My comment was concerning what is actually happening IRL.
The major problem is when their report was issued in May, their conclusions, recommendations and advice have been largely ignored in practice.
How are these being used in practice:
Require eye-level perspective views with any Special Permit application.
Direct more transformative change to areas on Washington Street that are outside the historic cores of the villages.
In the core of the villages, provide 12’ wide sidewalks. Where the right of way does not permit 12’ sidewalks, require new buildings to set back so as to create 12’ of clear sidewalk.
Marti,
I’m not sure where your criticism is directed. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t think there have been any Special Permit applications on Washington St since May, so it isn’t clear how it could be said that this guidance is being ignored.
I would completely expect eye-level perspective views to be part of the process, it’s not onerous. Mark Development’s pending proposal for West Newton extends out from the edge of the historic core, potentially replacing primarily car lots and warehouse structures.
Washington Place predates this vision (which is why Newton should have had a zoning vision for Washington St a long time ago: you can’t blame developers for not following what doesn’t exist). However, the latest Washington Place plans appear to have approximately 12′ sidewalks:
http://wpnewtonnew.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/18_03_08_NWVL_PCA_Revised-140-Plans.pdf
There currently three older buildings in West Newton are threatened with possible demolition. The discussion is ongoing. The historic importance and physical state of them varies dramatically. Why shouldn’t their fate be debated? Beyond that, the Washington St draft vision encourages historic facade preservation by providing minor zoning relief.
And I’m not sure what “the Mayor’s approval” means specifically? We have departments, commissions, a City Council. There are lots of checks on the executive. Whether she likes a project or not is only one piece of a plan. More specifics about your concern would help.
Mike, thanks for the questions and the info.
I’ll start on the last thing: “… with the Mayor’s approval.” It concerned historic buildings threatened in West Newton. The mayor approved trading the beautiful, historic police station building and the park beside it for a small parcel of land on Crafts’s Street. Mark Development planned to deface the building and do away with the park entirely. The Craft’s Street land then appeared as the new police station on a version the Washington Street vision plan.
I think I was pretty clear that my criticism is directed at both branch’s of Newton’s city government, including the school committee. I enumerated specific issues in my post. The latest being the rushed city council’s pay raise deliberation.
The fate of historic buildings when threatened should always be debated. I’m not concerned about the Barn location as the owners have contracted to move to Washington Place. I am concerned about the funeral home and the theater in particular.
I missed the latest design change of Washington Place so I am happy to learn that it includes a 12’ sidewalk.
Marti, your comments about the police station don’t include the fact that the submitted proposal wasn’t accepted, even by the Mayor, and would likely never have gotten through the City Council for any number of things that would have been required. Initial planning was rushed, perhaps, but there were plenty of checks built into the system.
You describe the police station as “beautiful and historic”, and doubtless people will agree with you. It personally doesn’t wow me enough to believe that it should remain untouched forever as it is at the expense of functionality (for the police or for some other use). I’ve said before, I wish it could become NewCAL, and an integrated contemporary police station built elsewhere. I feel the same for the park: I wish people who want to save the park (and I’m one of them) would demand the same amount love for it right now.
You bring up the theater. I can’t name a single person who doesn’t want the theater to remain. But let’s distinguish that from the external structure. I am eager to be educated, but I find the one-story storefronts on that block more tired than historic. The theater building itself is a featureless brick lump which is unfortunately quite visible on the Waltham St. approach.
So what’s the balance? We should talk about it. But after decades of ignoring these issues, there’s now outside forces actually making us do it. We are acting, in our own semi-dysfunctional Newton-y kind of way. But as the recent suggestion of 40B in West Newton demonstrates, there is some urgency to the matter.