A substantial group of citizens, including children demonstrators, greeted City officials tonight at a NewCAL information session at F. A. Day Middle School. Opponents to the siting of this senior center qua community center at Albemarle Park dominated the comments. They focused on parking and traffic problems, environmental issues, conflicts with school physical education programs and other recreational activities. Notably, a number of senior citizens spoke up in support of a new senior center, but asked that a better location be chosen. At least one senior citizen, too, stated that she did not want a multi-generational facility, preferring one dedicated to senior activities. A number of folks stated that they would have been involved earlier in the process if there had been any indications that parkland would have been considered for the facility.
I made a suggestion to the officials as they study the feasibility of this site and compare it to others: Very simply, to conduct a survey of senior citizens in Newton, asking whether they would be likely to use the programs of the center in each location. I have a feeling that many people will say “no” when the Albemarle option is presented, compared to other locations closer to the geographic center of the city, because of traffic and driving concerns from many neighborhoods. But it would be good to test out that proposition. I also have a feeling that many people will say that they are not likely to use the biggest single component of the proposed facility, the 10,000 square foot gymnasium. It is this component that drives a great deal of the projected space need for the building and limits the number of possible sites. But, again, it would be good to test out that proposition as well.
You can listen and watch for yourself once the meeting is posted, but I generally found the comments to be thoughtful, polite, and restrained. One F. A. Day student made a particularly eloquent presentation. And the city officials stayed as long as there were questions and comments and did their best to answer completely and in a straightforward fashion. All in all, it was a good night for democracy.
I would have liked to be able to attend but couldn’t make it. But it sounds like it struck many of the themes from the last two public listening/commenting opportunities
The mayor is so completely isolated in her Chestnut Hill bubble, it’s really a shame.
Paul, “it was a good night for democracy” IF the way more than overwhelming majority (probably nearly everybody) — they being strenuously opposed to NewCAL as currently scoped and sited in Albemarle or any park — are listened to and this foolhardy odyssey of an Athletic Center pretending to be Senior Center is immediately terminated. And the City then get on with planning a scoped down to Senior Center project outside of park or greenscape, which most people (including seniors) DO want.
Paul, thanks for this recap. I was not able to attend, but had friends who did — and it sounds like you weren’t at the same meeting. They were *shocked* that people shouted down the Director of Senior Services, didn’t let her finish her presentation, and interrupted her everytime she spoke, and that someone yelled out that the Parks & Rec Commissioner was on another planet. That is not a good night for democracy, that is bullying. It is no wonder that the many supporters of NewCal at Albemarle are afraid to voice that view in the face of such hostility? Albemarle belongs to all of us, not just the abutters to it.
Thanks, Beth. You’ll be able to see and judge for yourself when the video is put up, but I viewed those occasional outbursts as the exception and not the rule. The Director certainly was not interrupted every time. And truly, portions of her own comments were perceived as insensitive, which riled several in the crowd, and for which she graciously apologized later.
The line about Bob’s being from another planet was, indeed, rude. Those of us who know of his dedication and have worked with him were offended by that.
I’d like you to look at Josh Morse’s comments towards the end of the meeting, too, in which he urged people not to tag folks as “NIMBY’s” when they raised concerns about their neighborhoods. It was a statesmanlike moment, for which he received and deserved credit.
Having run difficult siting meetings myself–and knowing these three experienced and able public officials–we all have an expectation of strongly held views and even loud outbursts. That’s not bullying. People feel strongly when they feel that the quality of their lives is threatened, and a purpose of the meetings is to let such emotions be expressed. Here, for the most part, people patiently waited with their hands raised to be recognized, offered their views and questions, and the city officials gave their answers.
The final NewCAL presentation this month is tonight, to the Council on Aging (Senior Center, 7:30pm). Will they reflect on the near-total community opposition to this plan, and retract their endorsement to place a new municipal building on one of the last open spaces on this side of town, located at the most dangerous intersection in all of Newton (http://www.newtonpolice.com/FTP/MVYTD.HTM), abutting the most heavily used athletic field in the city and absorbing the courts used daily for outdoor recreation by both residents and the 1,000 children at the town’s largest middle school?
I’ll finally be missing a NewCAL meeting to put my children to bed, but I hope someone goes, and lets us know.
Like @jimepstein, I wonder about the democracy in this process; at both community meetings, people yelled angrily, “where’s the mayor?” only to hear the response, “She doesn’t care.” The north side needs representation. Councilor Emily Norton has stood in opposition to this plan since the beginning, but many other councilors seem to be on the fence, or unresponsive. Will they represent us, and save our park? Or will they represent the mayor?
Sign our petition at https://www.preservenewtonparks.com – and watch the meetings for yourself:
Last night: https://tinyurl.com/NewCAL092319
Thursday the 19th: https://tinyurl.com/NewCAL091919-PARTTWO and https://tinyurl.com/NewCAL091919-PARTONE
(no need to belong to Facebook – just put the video on full screen)
As I left last night at 10pm, proud of this incredible community for speaking up, I biked out into the heart of the beautiful open field that so many of us know and love, and wondered what it takes to be heard.
Jim, as we and others have noted, there have been serious flaws in the planning process to date. Several of these were brought out last night. For example, more than one person noted that they would have been more involved in the planning process if they had known there was any chance of this senior center being located on parkland; or if they had known that it was to be more than a senior center; or if the meetings had been scheduled at convenient times; or if there had been notification of the meetings in the senior newsletter; or if the Administration had chosen to run the meetings as open meetings; or if their minutes had been published in a timely fashion. I think a lot of the acrimony we are now seeing could have been alleviated had all that been done in a different way. Now, the public is left in catch-up mode.
What I fear, deeply, is that the Mayor is so committed to her current approach to NewCAL that, like another mayor’s involvement in NNHS several years ago, it becomes the all-consuming issue that colors discussion of many other issues. The concept of a new senior center should, by all rights, be a unifying theme for all the villages. The three department heads last night were just doing their job in explaining and defending the proposal: It’s really in the Mayor’s hands to lead the community to a result that brings pride to the citizenry.
I went to that meeting and had to walk out. I came to try and be informed about what the city is intending, but the audience was intent on shouting out questions and not lettting the presentation progress. The anger was so strong that I felt like I wasn’t getting anything useful.
That said, from a presentation standpoint I didn’t think the city did a great job on creating something digestable for the audience. So that didn’t help. Also, while this was my first meeting it’s clear that for most people this was their second or third.
I entirely understand the confusion about the details and the process, which is leading to anger and frustration. But I was hoping to learn something, and I feel like the only thing I learned is that people are angry.
Hi Chuck, There’s a ton of information on this site: https://newcal.projects.nv5.com/ Hoping that’s helpful.
The digital record will definitely show that democracy was in action last night! There has been plenty of passion and anger at many meetings that have changed history, and in this case we are trying to avoid a repeat of history – NNHS mentioned by many. These are families and many of us have spent our life’s savings on homes to be in this incredible city & community. No apologies for our anger.
Josh Morse deserves an award for answering every question to the end with 100% energetic sincerity! I looked on the NewCal site @ the survey results Jayne spoke about. Startling accurate, and it seems the commission has not listened to their own seniors or survey results? Verbatim it says:
“The great preponderance of people will come by car and will need to park. Very ample parking will be required in any new or rehabbed facility. NewCAL should be a Seniors-Only facility between 8am and 4pm on weekdays. After 4, and on weekends, it can be available for other Newton community groups/activities involving other age groups, as is actually the case with the current Sr. Center building to some extent.
Seniors who come and participate feel comfortable in the non-judgmental
atmosphere of seniors-only programs in a seniors-only facility. Many come for the camaraderie and friendship that develops — and many feel very strongly about this. (That does not mean they won’t welcome the occasional, unique, event that crosses generational lines like the Newton South crossing-generations club visits).
If Newton wants to also have a central recreation facility then it should build two facilities as Wellesley has done. Or it could build a very large facility with two separate wings: one for seniors and another for the general community. The difficulty with the latter idea is that it would require an extremely large plot of land which would likely require it ending up on the far periphery of Newton making it hard to reach for most people. And of course, if done right it would be very costly.”
!!! Let’s listen to our seniors, our community representatives, our children! A senior center is long overdue and should be built. But the current iteration does not meet the need of any people.
The temptation to be rude at these types of meetings is very strong. Some folks can’t help themselves. I’m certainly guilty of the head shake and the occasional (quiet) utterance.
I’ve hosted these meetings on occasion as a favor to non-profits. It is a real challenge and my topic wasn’t nearly as controversial.
The main problem is that folks that oppose an action really often don’t feel they are “heard” unless their opposition wins the day. And that builds frustration.
I get all that. But we also live in a society where we elect our leaders, and those local elections come very often.
Folks can be as angry as they want. Organize. Come out in force. But the moment you shout down the folks running the meeting or elected officials trying to figure out a path to thread the needle, you hurt your cause.
I truly relate to the anger. I’m on the opposing side of something right now in another community and I think it is completely unfair what the city is doing. Makes me want to shout at the rooftops.
But in these types of civil matters, the anger is counterproductive for most challenges.
Have your kids watch the video. If you feel uncomfortable showing them your behavior or that of your neighbors, perhaps you went too far.
And I’ve been at one of these meetings. Some folks were very rude. Large majority were not. But there are a few folks that do a great disservice to the opposition of NewCal.
Maybe have a slogan, what would Paul Levy do…? He’s done more to help the cause than anyone.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. I once had someone yell at my kid at one of these things about me so maybe I’m a bit sensitive. But man, folks say things in these meetings sometimes that they’d never say one on one. It is like an online forum brought to life.
Aristotle said it well, Fig:
“Anybody can become angry – that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way – that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy.”
Thank you for the commitment of time and expertise on this, Paul. What continues to astound me is the upward spiral of time, dollars and community ire that reflects a +1 for democracy as you suggest but serious demerits for city management and leadership.
I attended one of the early “listening” sessions in Newton Corner nearly a year ago (full disclosure: not a senior, not a native, a renter, and volunteer for Newton at Home). The process began as a “Natick has X size space and services, Brookline has Y facilities – so what does Newton want?” And we *still* have no clear answer for those questions — let alone answers, costs and benefits.
The exhausting current set of activist causes, development proposals and opposition groups throughout the city only adds fuel as residents choose sides. It won’t get any quieter, but a reasoned, multi-faceted view deserves recognition.
To amplify Fig’s comments: I was at the meeting at the Ed Center, and a few louder opposition voices interrupted other people or spoke out of turn, preempting others who were actually speaking in opposition but from their own perspective. I found these individual stories and opinions to be very interesting and useful. It was a shame to lose them.
Please let people have their say.
@Cedar G Pruitt many of us feel this way about Washington Street development. The input from citizens (as per Newton Area Council survey, and even the Principle Group findings) are not in line with what the councilors are planning.
The rude and disrespectful remarks aside, am I missing something? A wonderful new pool and state-of-the art facility is what’s being proposed – an amenity the entire community, especially our seniors, can enjoy. But instead of being broadly supported, it provoked ire, anger and rudeness. Am I missing something?
@am I missing something I went to the meeting with that thought in mind as well. What I heard was anger at a few things:
1) Traffic and Parking — These are primary issues for many people especially when you bring in the teachers who use that area as parking for the school. Day is land constrained and transportation alternatives don’t (yet) exist on that part of the city.
2) Usable hardscape — The new facility will take over where the basketball and tennis courts are now. Finding a new location for those is not yet planned and has people a bit frustrated
3) Continued development — I heard the phrases “Riverside” and “Washington Street” shouted out a lot. I also heard people shouting out about Mayor Fuller and developers. This suggested to me that people are not happy with development in general and any additional development has them upset.
4) Planning and Process — This is, to me, the most interesting one. People felt blindsided by how fast this process felt. One person sitting behind me shouted out the question “when were these public meetings? We may have missed them given that it was summer!” The process extends back 18 months, and further when you consider that it came up during the mayoral campaign. But I get the impression that most people didn’t give it much thought until it focused on this particular piece of land.
@ Chuck in regards to 2) Usable hardscape — The new facility will take over where the basketball and tennis courts are now. Finding a new location for those is not yet planned and has people a bit frustrated.”
This was also a big issue in the meeting on the 16th. At the beginning of the presentation it was stated that Albemarle rose to the top of the parkland locations because it wasn’t going to take any greenspace. But there was also a commitment that anything of value that was lost would be replaced in that same general location. But then when it was clear that the basketball and tennis courts are heavily used there was some back peddling and it was said they would be replaced. Then people pointed out that replacing them would take green space. I am really surprise that given the city had a week since that first meeting to formulate a plan that it sounds like they weren’t more prepared.
The other point of issue at the 16th meeting was that none of those who
spoke who would appear to have been solidly in the senior citizen category were supportive. They wanted a dedicated space in a central location
@Am I Missing Something What you might be missing is:
1) How will this be paid for and if not a tax override what won’t get funded and are those the right priorities
2) Who asked for this? It seems that the seniors want their own space.
3) The city is proposing to take parkland which is very unpopular
Hi Claire,
1) bonding
2) the Council on Aging and the senior population have been advocating for a new senior center for years. You may recall at the mayoral debate held at the senior center (moderated by Greg) every candidate promised to build one. Once elected, Mayor Fuller kept her promise. It will be a space for seniors, when not used for senior programming it will be available to all. Just like Newton North or other community assets — when not in use by the primary users it is available to all.
3) The city is proposing to build on a basketball court and tennis courts, hardscape — sacrificing no city green space.
Beth,
No one, certainly not me, is arguing against a Senior Center. You tried to make that point in the Parks and Recs meeting and almost to a person everyone said they support a new Senior Center so it is a little disingenuous to keep making that assertion that people who oppose NewCal oppose a Senior Center. Many of us have issue with an all generation recreation center. I personally am advocating for a first class Senior Center dedicate to seniors. If Newton want to build a new rec center, put it on the ballot and let people vote for that.
As for your third point, exactly where are they saying they will build this tennis and basketball courts? I heard a suggestion of some currently unusable space by the school that could potentially become a basketball court but that seemed a bit nebulous.
As for the Mayor keeping her promises, that is debatable. This is not a done deal. And this is not a Senior Center
Am I Missing Something – The Working Group was formed to plan for a senior center. When it morphed into a community center, the larger community should have been informed with a significant communications effort. Then other constituencies should have been offered representation on the WG – Newton Conservators, PTO’s, school committee members, councilors representing different parts of the city, etc. That didn’t happen – the WG as it planned a community center and that was not its original mission. It was not until the spring that people began to hear about it by word of mouth. This is NOT how you spend peoples’ tax dollars.
Clearly you think this is a great idea. Perhaps you could identify a park near your home and advocate for the placement of the center on it. Just an FYI, at last week’s meeting, when someone suggested moving it to the southside of the city, there was a chorus of “NO’s” from people who live in that part of the city.
The funding of this facility is my major concern. A new concept, 38,000 sf facility should be funded through a debt exclusion override to ensure community support.
Does anyone have a link for tonight’s live stream? I can’t seem to find it
Um…I was at the Mayoral Forum too, (maybe as a participant?) and I pledged to build a new senior center. NewCAL isn’t quite what some of us had in mind – most certainly – not to build on parkland – hardscaped or not.
I fear that the desire to have the Gath Pool upgraded to what it should be is being used as a dangling carrot. Folks – the Gath Pool and all of our fields and parks need investment period.
RE The city is proposing to build on a basketball court and tennis courts, hardscape — sacrificing no city green space — but sacrificing recreational space which is equally important and supposed to be protected, not plundered by the Parks AND Recreational dept. The tennis courts & basketball courts are the heart of the sole outdoor recreational space for the #1 biggest middle school and #1 most used park in Newton.
Fields behind the school are used during the school day and after school for activities such as community-building during Community Block and athletics during PE classes and as part of after school programming for Many clubs.
How could that be omitted from 18 months of work?? This was one of THE biggest sources of ire at the meeting & in the community!
It’s a removal of recreational space. Parks AND Rec dept. came to their own meeting two weeks ago with NO PLAN to replace these!!! In fact they said we will do a study to see IF it’s there is a lot of use! Betraying to us they had done no proper research and felt like they didn’t care about the schools’ & kids needs. By the third public meeting this week, P&R still had no concrete, actual plan but the replacement had been upgraded to the commissioner saying we would “possibly” replace them. When I questioned him on the word “possibly” he said the community and these (angry) meetings have shown there is the need, we are looking into it, we will do it, etc. But still NO actual, concrete plan.
HUH? So the Parks & Rec and working committee spent 18 months evaluating sites, many of which were playgrouds and parks, and came to the public questioning the need to replace the core of the outdoor recreational space of the largest middle school in Newton and #1 most used park in Newton?
This thoughtless and heartless stance is what brought so many of us to feel angry and not recongized by our representatives at Parks and Rec. Many in the community felt the need to document the courts’ use with photos & videos: literally from sun up to past sun down, those courts are in use. And it’s a wonderful thing to see.
That is the stem of the justifiable outrage, a city coming to the table with: we will take your rec space away from your children and school kids — and “possibly” replace it … with still no concrete plan.
This unprepared position of the city has pitted seniors against kids. Terrible. We all know there is a need for a dedicated senior center. Non park and playground alternatives need to be brought to the table, and until then the Preserve Newton Parks group, which now represents 10% of the adults in Newton will not go away and neither will Friends of Abermarle nor the parents at these schools. Our school commitee representatives should be speaking up as well.
PS I looked at the list of sites not shortlisted for NewCAl: Out of 17, 13 were parks and playgrounds.
Kim thanks for your post, it helps me to understand the reaction better. We have had NewCal supporters at every community meeting and many have felt the level of hostility/anger expressed. I will say to all who keep reiterating that you are for a senior center, *prove it*. Help us move forward, advocate for the new senior center as ferociously as you advocated to protect your neighborhood or soccer fields. Anywhere this gets sited is going to generate opposition. Claire/Amy – just call me 617-216-9046, it will be easier to talk than type. NewCal is a senior center, I am not being disingenuous (Claire) and we need the space, including a gym, for program considerations (Amy).
I’m glad that helped. We truly cherish our seniors and do not want to be fighting with them. We feel this process has been one-sided in looking at mainly parks and playgrounds and need to see a true evaluation of alternatives.
We would like to clarify what seniors want in terms of must haves and nice to haves, agree on the criteria beforehand. We are told they want a dedicated senior center, but NewCal is not that at all.
Many have brought up Newton Triangle, the old police station in W. Newton, Was told money is an issue for those. Acquinas site looks viable with 6 acres, city doesn’t need that much for one school. We have not seen a truly in-depth look at that city-owned site.. ?
Beth, the Mayor’s current NewCAL (at Albemarle Park) is NOT a Senior Center. It is an Athletic/Community Center.
The sooner the Mayor abandons her current foolhardy odyssey, we can get on with the task of planning for a Senior Center.
Those, like yourself, who continue to push for the current Albemarle NewCAL are only delaying and making more difficult an actual new Senior Center. Those, like the vast majority of Newton residents who oppose Albemarle NewCAL, are the ones who are actually aiming to facilitate a new Senior Center.
Words matter! And it’s really important that we all listen to each other. Really listen.
I think a lot of the anger at the recent community meetings might have been avoided if people who had not been previously involved had clearly heard the words “feasibility study” instead of immediately jumping to a “finalized decision.”
None of this is easy. We expect that our public officials will use our tax dollars wisely. So we expect them to start any project looking for a least cost solution before moving to a more costly alternative. Expensive construction options like underground parking to reduce a project foot print or costly and time consuming private land acquisition shouldn’t be the first choice.
For the NewCAL project we are at the starting point, not the final decision.
Part of looking at any site for any building project in a city as completely built as Newton involves getting into the uses and trade offs. It’s not fair to assume that Parks and Recreation or the Public Buildings Department know the intimate details of each and every parcel that the City owns. They might know a lot about a specific chronic challenge like the leaking water at the pool, but the usage of a specific tennis court or basketball court doesn’t rise to that level until there has been something like a feasibility study. That’s when questions like the feasibility of relocating those facilities get worked out. And if it turns out that there is no way to reorganize the exiting uses that works for the users, then it’s time to move onto the next possible site.
I was saddened, if not surprised, that the community meeting at the Day School quickly descended into angry venting instead of expressing the issues that should be critically examined.
We have to do better listening to each other respectfully. We are all in this together.
Some wise thoughts, Joan, for sure; but I also think you are missing how the process chosen by the mayor for this project has led to the very kinds of meetings you witnessed. The listening sessions for the programmatic aspects of this facility did not impose a true structure on the options to be considered. The meetings of the NewCAL working group were not public, nor were there deliberations published as things moved along. Even, the regular city newsletter to us seniors did not contain timetables or summaries of the deliberations. A process which focused so intensely on use of city-owned land, and mainly parkland, violates the procedures that need to be followed by the Parks and Recreation Commission. And, although, you say that this a “starting point,” any prudent person watching the summer’s actions by the Working Group would be well justified as thinking that this is a train that has already left the station. The anger that you saw at this meeting were a result of the seeds sown by the Administration’s approach to this project.
Now, it’s time to take a deep breath and think through things in a more careful manner. What is the program for the senior center that seniors really want? What location(s) for this program would be most desirable? Let’s ask the constituents from all over town these questions and see where that leads. That will be a more expeditious approach to getting this done than trying to fit a round peg into a square hole at Albemarle.
@Beth Dugan, I’m sorry that you and others feel the need to justify a need for the Senior Center. Everyone I have talked to about this, agrees with the need for a senior center. Hopefully it is not an uphill battle. Location will be difficult, but the need is clearly there. Hopefully seniors will the dedicated space they deserve.
Is a senior center needed in 50+ years?
I moved to Newton from Newburyport, where a community center was built after nationwide and local surveys indicated seniors needed a building at the time but future seniors didn’t think they’d use it.
How much discussion in Newton focused on a community center?
Beth – To begin with, I’m a senior who opposes this project, but completely supports a new designated senior center and am willing to help to make that happen. If you realize that people thought the Working Group was developing a plan for a designated senior center and are upset about not being included in the process, then maybe we can move forward in a more productive. I haven’t heard anyone oppose a senior center, but this proposal is four times the size of the current one and is plainly a community center size facility. Other constituencies need to have a seat at the table.
It’s the gymnasium that’s one major problem. Within 400-500 yards of that spot on Albemarle field, there are three other gymnasiums – at Day MS, the Boys and Girls Club, and the H-M school. The NewCAL gymnasium would be the fourth within a very small area. As a senior, I know this is the first thing that could be eliminated from the design without significantly .
The Working Group needs to understand another source of frustration. This 38,000 sf facility was called an intergenerational center until the opposition to it became apparent. Then suddenly it was a senior center again, but the square footage remained the same. In large part the frustration reflects the refusal to consider any change whatsoever to the design and square footage. The process has proceeded without an explanation for how decisions are made and without including large segments of the population in the city onto the WG. Even now, I don’t hear of a plan to include other constituencies.
You also need to understand that inappropriate anger has been expressed to people on both sides of this project. I know because it happened to me. Just because the words aren’t spoken in at a public meeting doesn’t mean that it hasn’t happened. It has.
I’m not comfortable with the shift in focus to the anger expressed at public meetings on the part of proponents of the project. Given that the proposal continues forward as it’s designed with no changes whatsoever, it comes across a bit of a red herring. Site it in a centralized location near amenities, remove the gymnasium, and I think you will make great progress moving forward.
Josh Morse has done a magnificent job of presenting the current design, but every concern is met with a reason why the facility must move forward as planned. We’d all love all the buildings in the city to magically be state of the art, with every bell and whistle. But the truth is that with the exception of the rebuilt/renovated buildings, just about every building in the city is in the same state or disrepair as the senior center. Everyone has to give a bit.
@Joan, I think you have to put this into the context that many people, myself included, on the north side of the pike feel not listened to, in spite of the fact that we have listened ( attended the Hello Washington Street process, etc.) I wasn’t at the meeting, but perhaps some of this sentiment spilled into that meeting. Enough is enough. No more ” stuff” on our side of town, somebody else take the building.
Written before coffee. Insert the obviously left out words in two places and it makes sense.
If the city council or Mayor will set a reasonable budget with a way to pay for it, then the Working Group can work backwards to determine which elements of the senior center are most important and, as Jane suggests, pare back the “nice to have” elements that can be found elsewhere in the city.