The advocacy group Livable Newton asked all of the city council candidates (even those who are not in contested races) to answer 12 questions. Not all of the candidates responded but you can read the responses from those who did here.
Group asks all candidates about housing, villages, diversity & more (only some answered)
by Greg Reibman | Oct 15, 2019 | City Council elections, Newton | 3 comments
I hope everyone will read these answers, because there are clear differences between the candidates.
My opponent said: “Housing in the Greater Boston area is expensive. I do not believe Newton on its own can do much about that. There is an argument that building more housing in Newton will bring the price of housing in the entire region down. I do not believe that to be the case.”
How can we say with a straight face that the solution to our regional housing crisis is to do nothing? Newton has joined 14 other municipalities in the region in a pledge to increase housing supply, yet my opponent seems to be telling other cities and towns we can’t make good on that commitment.
My opponent said: “I believe to help address housing affordability for the region we should be improving our public transportation system so that people could live in the more affordable cities and towns and have a reasonable commute to Boston”.
How can we say we are a welcoming city if our plan for people who can’t afford Newton is to tell them to live elsewhere and force them to commute through our city from further away?
There is a clear choice in the Ward 2 City Council race. Newton is fast becoming unaffordable for all except the very wealthy, and I am the only candidate in this race that believes we should be doing something about it. I support proactive planning to deliberately ensure housing is affordable throughout all neighborhoods of the city, in proximity to transportation, and built to the highest environmental standards. It is the responsibility of the City Council to help us meet our housing needs while ensuring that the projects approved are in scale, managed appropriately, and provide substantial benefits to the city.
Because building more housing is treating a symptom, not a cause.
The cause is irresponsible development in downtown Boston, in areas that will be flooded as soon as 2030.
Boston reaps the tax rewards, asks the surrounding towns to build more housing, developers see $$$$, and local towns also see $$$ ( although that’s debatable).
Follow the money. Nobody in that loop gives a flying monkey about affordable housing. They just use that to make it sound palatable to gullible liberals.
What Rick said.