According to the city’s unofficial results, Bill Humphrey with 491 votes and Kathy Winters with 483 are moving on to the general election for Ward 5 ward councilor. Rena Getz earned 437 votes.
Humphrey, Winters best Getz
by Sean Roche | Sep 10, 2019 | Newton | 36 comments
If only Rena had participated on Village 14! 😉
@Greg, imagine if Getz actually had a website and campaigned!
@Sarah: I’m only half joking about Village 14. Candidates who decline opportunities to engage beyond their base do so at their own peril. And, as I’ve said many times before, Village 14 readers aren’t likely voters, they will vote. I suspect if she turned down Village 14’s request to answer written questions, she turned down other opportunities too.
Meanwhile, Getz had enthusiastic endorsements from the Newton Villages Alliance and Opt-Out. And like every single NVA endorsed candidate before her, and like Opt-Out’s failed ballot campaign, they couldn’t deliver. I suspect we’ll see the similar results this November if the candidates running on these out-of-touch groups’ slates only campaign inside the NVA/OptOut bubbles
It was very close. So unfortunate that we needed to have a preliminary election and not allow all three candidates to proceed to the final. I think we would have had a very spirited debate on each candidate’s approach to the issues facing Newton and their vision for the Newton’s future. Congratulations to all for their willingness to serve!
@all but especially Reibman I find this very interesting. Getz entered the race late, had her website up late, and arguably wasn’t as organized as her competitors and still got a respectable result. I wouldn’t say the opt out/NVA groups are out of touch bubbles but instead that they have legitimate concerns that warrant listening to. We should not be disparaging any groups that participate in the dialogue although they may disagree with your view.
And Greg, anticipating your response, my comments do not reflect an endorsement for either Opt out or NVA but rather an endorsement for embracing all views, whether they disagree with me or not.
Let’s dial back on the structural challenges Candidate Getz had to overcome. She’s a founding member of the Waban Area Council. She’s not a newbie who struggled to break out.
@David Kalis – I totally agree. If find this whole either/or pro/anti development talk counterproductive. People being generically across the board anti-development or across the board pro-development is a myth. If there is anybody in this city who is 100% anti-development or 100% pro-development, they’re not playing with a full deck.
None of this should be viewed through a winner-takes-all lens.
Agree she is not a newbie in Waban area politics but as a candidate, it definitely takes time to find your voice and establish a trajectory. I watched from afar, bet definitely saw that Humphrey and Winters found their voices and ran strong campaigns. I honestly expected them to run away with this which is why I’m intrigued.
I hear you Jerry. Lots of shades of
Gray.
Jerry and David, who are both decent, kind-hearted souls,
You are kidding yourselves. There is a group of folks who are adamantly anti-development. They have organized themselves around blocking development. They speak in explicitly anti-development terms. They have anti-development heroes. And, they wield influence because of their passion on the point. Whatever grey is in the palette hasn’t hit them.
A salient political question for the fall, given the projects in front of the council: what political influence do they wield? If you are an elected official, to what extent do you have to fear losing your seat if you do not vote in line with their clearly expressed policy preference.
You can quibble with the strength of the evidence, but a reasonable person might conclude that an anti-development banner-carrier running third in a ward with a very large development project before the council indicates that there is a lot less anti-development sentiment in the city than one might otherwise fear. To put it in your terms, outside of what appears to be a relatively small group, there is a lot of grey.
Your mileage may vary.
@Sean where you see this as political, I see it as about people. Maybe I’m naive, but I look to find compromise. Someone may have their anti development hero (have no idea who that might be) while someone else their development hero (again, at a loss) but I see it as my job to find the middle, to give and take so that as many as possible (even those with different hero’s) can claim a win for the City.
@Sean — nice set of posts covering the election season. Would not your comment apply equally if you searched and replaced anti with pro?
While I want to believe that we are thoughtful about our positions and think through the implications of both development and non-development, I can’t help but agree with Sean that this city has divided into camps.
As evidence, I look at a proposal for a boutique hotel and housing on the corner of River Street and Lexington Street across from Rumford Ave. There have been rumors for a couple of weeks, but a Facebook page went up a few days ago and an email on a local listserv not only announced that it was happening, but that they’d already started a petition to oppose.
When I asked Planning Director Barney Heath about the proposal last night he had no information on it. We don’t even know what this is, and people are already opposing it (on grounds that it will increase traffic).
Can’t we look for solutions instead of problems? Change is inevitable, shouldn’t we find a way to work with it rather than just coming out against?
Anecdotally, everyone I personally talk to is in the middle area of pro and anti. They may lean one way or the other, but I think it’s hardly as black or white as the Seans or the Gregs or the Chucks of V14 insist.
@Chuck – your example is kind of what I’d expect from people. Rumors generate swirl and fear. Not having information does the same. It’s natural for people to then respond defensively. I agree that forming a petition based on little information is not the best course of action, but, I get it. I guess if your use of this example was to make a point, fine, but not a good example. We both know there will always be people on the far ends of opposition and cheerleading, but it’s finding those areas of uncomfortable agreement and compromise that are critical to help move use forward. Continuing the conversation and calcifying people into one camp vs. another does no good.
The NVA has a solid history of being anti-change. Anywhere. Anytime. Any proposed change is going to increase traffic, reduce parking, change the character of our villages, overcrowd the schools, hurt local business, bring in renters (gasp!), turn Newton into Brookline/Somerville/Cambridge. Some villages are “under siege!”
“Rumors generate and swirl fear.” They don’t do so on their own. We have a well- organized anti-change group in Newton that spreads misinformation on list servs and by other means. Spearheading an “anti” petition on a project with so little information is irresponsible and divisive and stems from fear-mongering.
I agree that a wide majority of Newton residents support a thoughtful approach to development. And I don’t know anyone who supports “all development all the time.” But it’s incorrect to say we don’t have residents who are solidly anti-development in any form. They gain a disproportionate voice in our discourse because they’re loud, angry and well-organized.
We need more city councilors who can listen, lead, build consensus, stay positive, proactively spread accurate information, grasp the complexities of policy, educate people on development as it relates to climate change and the housing crisis. When councilors don’t do this, they amplify the voice of a powerful, destructive minority. We need councilors who can allow Newton to fulfill its potential as a city that can lead on these issues.
This is why I’m supporting first-time candidates Bryan Barash, Carolina Ventura, Bill Humphrey, and Alicia Bowman.
@David Kalis: Thanks for your participation here. I agree, the citizens active with these groups have many legitimate concerns. And every resident deserves to be heard.
My point however, was that it’s a mistake for any candidate to think they can be successful staying inside the bubbles of those groups’ lists serves, networks or events.
I mentioned the fact that Rena Getz declined to participate on Village 14 as one example.
Here’s another: This summer, I ran into both Bill Humphrey and Kathy Winters attending a variety of Newton-Needham Chamber events. Now maybe — but more likely maybe not because many business owners don’t live in Newton, or Ward 5 — they picked up some votes at these events.
But even if they didn’t they engaged in conversations with taxpayers who rarely if ever show up at the usual municipal events and, hopefully, learned some things that made them better, well-rounded, candidates.
Apologies in advance if I’m mistaken but I don’t recall seeing Rena at any chamber events.
Now, I’m not saying that if Rena participated on Village 14 or attended chamber events she would have won yesterday. But if she didn’t take advantage of these two paths, what else did she pass up that might have earned that small number of votes she would have needed to prevail?
Also, I don’t mean to diminish the concerns that some residents have about particular developments. We need all stakeholders to participate in the process so that all perspectives are heard and we can work toward consensus. What we don’t need is the rabble rousing through misinformation and fearmongering.
@Greg “My point however, was that it’s a mistake for any candidate to think they can be successful staying inside the bubbles of those groups’ lists serves, networks or events.” – strongly agree with this sentiment. Thx
I would like to thank Rena Getz for her participation. I wish these little runoffs were not needed as I prefer a full electorate to make these votes.
I hesitate to draw conclusions from this. And I think it is unfair to criticize Candidate Getz for her campaign after the fact. Fact is I saw signs and enthusiasm for all 3, and it was very close.
Sometimes I think all of us underestimate the massive dedication of time and energy to run for these positions. And then to actually win and do the work!
I disagree with many of the folks in City Council and school committee on certain issues. And I’ve been frustrated with some of them. And that’s my right and that’s ok. But I will always respect the time and energy and dedication needed to run for public office. And thank them for that, even if I don’t agree with them.
So again, thank you Rena Getz.
Nicely said, Fig. Campaigning alone can be full-time, much less Council duties and then what really earns you enough to stay here.
Oh–and I would thank Rena for voting, but I don’t think she reads V14.
Once again, Fig is right, of course. I appreciate Rena’s willingness to serve and her work on the area council. But I believe she either received some bad campaign advice or should have sought good advice from someone.
Right Size Newton has just put out a press release regarding their endorsements for City Council:
https://rightsizenewton.org/2019/09/11/rightsize-newton-endorses-candidates-for-city-council/
While she did not get elected to the ward seat last night, it should be noted that Rena Getz got nearly double the votes (Getz-138, Humphrey-76, Winters-38) in the Upper Falls 5-1 precinct as the #2 candidate.
The skew between this precinct and the rest of Ward 5 is striking and that’s down to concerns about the Northland Project’s impact on Upper Falls.
While it was not enough to get her elected, it does show that those concerns are real and widespread in the neighborhood.
@Jerry I noticed that as well, but my conclusion was slightly different. I think it may demonstrate how concentrated the concerns about development truly are. A lot of people here have commented that the vast majority of Newton residents tend to take a more laissez faire attitude about development, but the minority who border the development tend to be the most passionate.
This would seem, on the surface, to bolster that argument.
Except we actually do know what this is (what the developers are proposing) because they have a public Facebook page (with details and renderings) that went up at the beginning of August: https://www.facebook.com/340-River-Street-Project-103184457703367/
For those not on Facebook: “This project is being proposed by Fred & Jesse Camerato. We are proposing a quaint 45 room boutique hotel located on top of the 1st floor of mixed-use space. All 62 car parking will be provided underground and accessible from the River St entrance. The workforce housing building will consist of 10 units with 10 car parking designed into the middle of the building while having a separate entrance off of Lexington St. Proposed Building time is approximately 1 yr”
I’ve seen the proposal discussed in the Auburndale Village group and the new “Newton Residents Civic Debate” group, but neither mention an opposition “Facebook page that went up a few days ago” or a “petition to oppose” – are you saying that NVA has set up a FB page and a petition to oppose this development? Do you have links that you could share? Because if not, you’re doing the thing that you’re accusing the other side of doing.
Right Size Newton’s press release warrants a separate thread.
Congratulations Rena, Kathy, and Bill for taking the time out of your lives/work to run for City Council.
Rena is a valued member of the Newton Community, very much engaged in current events and has been very helpful to me in my role as an At Large Councilor in understanding the many local issues in Ward 5. I look forward to seeing Rena still involved and active in the community.
Bill and Kathy, Congratulations, and I’m looking foward to seeing you both on the campaign trail!!!
@rightsizeNewton: Seriously with all the work being done by At Large Councilors City Wide you couldn’t find one incumbent to endorse? You searched far and wide and endorsed new candidates, some founding members of RightSize, that have never worked on, and voted on large projects. Politics is about collabioration.
While I don’t share many of their views, I don’t think it’s helpful or accurate to accuse the NVA or other groups of spreading rumors or misinformation. The people I know who are active in these groups are usually very well informed on development projects. They may have different interpretations and opinions on how to move forward than I and others may have, but it’s not fair to disparage them as “spreading misinformation.”
@tricia Here, in its entirety, is the email sent to the Franklin community. I never attributed the opposition to the NVA, I only said that a petition had been started:
There is a little known project that has been quietly working its way through the planning process that involves putting a hotel up at the corner of River St and Lexington Street in addition to numerous living units and retail. If you travel down Lexington on any given weekday, you know the traffic is already a challenge to begin with. The developer has purchased the corner stores and the surrounding four lots over the past few years in preparation for this.There was a meeting Thursday night concerning the proposed development of 340 River St (the corner of River St. and Lexington St.). There were about 40 people at the meeting. Two of our elected councilors were at the meeting to explain what they know, Ward Councilor Christopher J. Markiewicz and Councilor-at-Large Leonard J. Gentile. This project is still in the very early stages. However, the project has been presented to a city planning committee, and there are several issues that will have to be addressed at various stages of the approval process.
The development is for a 45 room boutique hotel with 67 parking spaces. There is also a workforce 10 unit, 2 bedroom condo with 10 parking spaces. The developer has a facebook page (post? We’re not on facebook).
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Real-Estate-Developer/340-River-Street-Project-103184457703367/
There is a small group that has started a petition opposing the development, which we have a copy of if you are interested in reading it. There are also prints out of the currently proposed structures (as the Councilors pointed out, it may have already changed) and a city map of the four lots the developer is proposing to use for the development. One thing to note, the prints only show 3 stories yet the plans on file clearly call for a large four story structure.
If you are interested in learning more, please let me know. Most of the content here is from our neighbor’s emails to our William St neighborhood but I am reaching out to the Franklin Community as they have no kids at the elementary school anymore.
Thanks and apologies for the lengthy email!!
@Chuck So my point has been made.
The original email from the listserv said: “There is a small group that has started a petition opposing the development…”
Your comment here said: “…an email on a local listserv not only announced that it was happening, but that they’d already started a petition to oppose.
Rhanna’s follow-up comment begins with criticism of the NVA, then adds: “We have a well- organized anti-change group in Newton that spreads misinformation on list servs and by other means. Spearheading an “anti” petition on a project with so little information is irresponsible and divisive and stems from fear-mongering.”
It may not have been the intention, but it certainly gives the impression that the NVA is behind the petition. And as for the Planning Dept having no information on the proposal – that seems odd as it was described in detail in the Staff Memorandum for the Urban Design Commission’s meeting on August 14:
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/98350
@Jim @rightsizeNewton: Seriously with all the work being done by At Large Councilors City Wide you couldn’t find one incumbent to endorse?
They endorsed Allan “Jay” Ciccone who is At Large from Ward 1 . RSN has incorrectly listed him as a ward councilor.
Alison,
Isn’t RSN endorsing Jay’s father, who is running for ward councilor?
@Sean, yes of course. I forgot he was running…again .