The anti-development group Right Sized Newton is blanketing the city with color glossy flyers promoting their slate of candidates. The problem is this is likley illegal under state law.
Right Sized is a nonprofit and not a registered political action committee. The rules governing this type of activity are very clear.
Right Sized is also asking for donations on its website, right next its list of endorsements . This too is likely illegal.
They are not following the laws that the two other Newton PACS are following by registering, setting up a dedicated bank account and reporting donations and expenses. They could be fined by the Office of Campaign and Political Finance and lose their status as a nonprofit.
Right Size Newton — and their leader Randall Block — should do the right thing and stop distributing these materials immediately.
Right Size Newton — and their leader Randall Block — should do the right thing and destroy any flyers that have been printed.
Right Size Newton — and their leader Randall Block — should do the right thing and remove the “donate” button from its webside.
Greg,
It would appear that the fliers are fine. Right Size Newton merely has to delete the donation box from its website.
@Jim. Nope. They can’t be raising money and therefore can’t be spending money they are raising for this purpose. So they’re illegal too.
The law is clear. There’s no way to spin this.
Someone from that group (ab assumption on my part) just made a deposit of all that literature in my mailbox about 30 minutes ago. I thought by law a mailbox is intended only for receipt of postage-paid US Mail.
@Jim Epstein – If they are indeed a 501(c)3 registered non-profit (I don’t know if they are) then this very clear language from the IRS web site would definitely apply.
… I do love their logo though.
Greg,
Along with deleting the donation box from its website, all they have to do is simply stop raising money.
(What are their significant expenses going forward anyway?)
No Jim. They should stop distributing materials purchased with funds that were raised illegally.
Why are you trying to make excuses for them?
There is no way to spin this.
FirstGenNewton,
I’d suggest that going forward, Right Size Newton merely deposit its literature in non-mailbox slots (such as doors, etc.) .
(Likely to get more attention in those non-mailbox slots anyway.)
Greg,
Since you ask, “Why are you trying to make excuses for them,” I’d ask, why are you trying to shut them down?
Greg,
Do you know for certain that it registered as a 501(c)(3) and not a 501(c)(4)? You are correct that a 501(c)(3) may not try to influence elections by supporting candidates, but the rules for a 501(c)(4) are a bit looser. Also, I do not believe contributions to a 501(c)(4) are tax deductible though I could be off on that.
@Lisap. Not sure what their nonprofit status is (that was Jerry) but regardless they are violating OCPF rules and, perhaps more importantly, not living up to the standards of transparency set by our two election PACs.
Isn’t this the same group threatening to foist a special election on us whenever they don’t get their way with real estate projects at City Hall?
How do they plan to do that if they can’t even abide by the most basic campaign laws?
And Greg, it appears that Right Size Newton simply purchased the existing materials being distributed from its general funds and has not raised the funds specifically for giving to candidates.
@Jim: Are you speaking on behalf of Right Sized? Because otherwise how do you know if they’ve raised specfic funds for these candidates or not because there has been no public disclosure of who their donors are or how much or when it was raised as required by law.
Certainly their website lists a “donate” button right next to its endorsements.
So please stop making excuses for them.
How does this tie into the Newton Democracy PAC? I thought they were the same group.
It also appears that Rightsize Newton has been engaging in an independent expenditure campaign in support of the same candidates:
https://www.ocpf.us/Reports/DisplayReport?id=11954&isIndependentSpendingReport=true
While this is an interesting back and forth and all, perhaps someone from Right Size can explain their thinking. Generally I’d think they’d want to just form a PAC. It isn’t that difficult.
Even if they are a 501c4, considering their other activities, I’m guessing they made a mistake here. You don’t see other tax exempts sending out slates for this reason directly. There are so many ways to get your message out, and email lists are easily used for many purposes.
With that said, mistakes happen. I also think our system of PACs, donations, and other surrogates tends to be complicated enough. But everyone should follow the same sets of rules, and I’d advise RSN to fix this ASAP or if they think they have it right, I’d be interested to know how.
I also think that in the end, we are one community. I have no desire to rake any particular person or group over the proverbial coals. Newer organizations sometimes have a learning curve. I may not agree with RSN, but I recognize the difficulty in community organizing the right way.
They should still be on the “right” side of the law though.
I’m ready to declare tomorrow November 5th-bam-get this election done. The sturm and drang on all sides isn’t good for the community.
Jane,
I get that election season can be intense. But, isn’t this a little different? Is this really a both-sides kind of thing? Is there an example on the “other” side of failing to abide the rules?
Just a reminder that the anti-development folks had issues with following the rules the last go ’round.
Yes, election law can be complicated, but most campaigns manage to figure it out.
Fact 1 . The Newton Needham Chamber of Commerce is a 501(c)(6) organization, and subject to similar laws about political involvement. A few years ago, the Chamber, under the leadership of Greg Reibman publicly advocated that the city council approve Austin Street.
Fact 2. I searched the MA non-profit data base for Rightsize Newton, and it came back goose eggs. Nothing.
HMMM. Let’s pretend, contrary to the evidence, that Rightsize Newton is registered as 501(c)(6) . My advice is that everyone takes a deep breath, and they hire the same tax accountant as the Chamber to sign their form 990. Greg can make the contact.
Last, I think we should stop the name calling. Rightsize Newton does not describe themselves as “anti-housing .” If we want better conversations about city issues on V14, let’s describe organizations they way they describe themselves.
@Jeffery: Chambers and other 501 c(6) business associations across the country are legally allowed to do – can advocate for issues. We cannot endorse candidates. We certainly can’t raise money for candidates. We do advocate for issues and, occasionally, take a position on ballot referendums. Totally different rules.
Of course, Right Size also endorses or opposes development too. That’s was the reason they were established. That’s totally cool.
I don’t even see a problem with Right Size endorsing candidates that support its positions. It’s raising money to help those candidates that’s a problem. It’s spending that money on glossy, four color, flyers that’s a problem. It’s not disclosing who is financing them that’s a problem.
To do those things they need to form a PAC. They need to disclose their donors and expenses. They need to share their bank statements.
Randall Block and Right Sized Newton are not doing this.
@Jane this in not about “all” sides. It’s not even one side. The Newton Democracy PAC is supporting the same candidates as Right Sized. But Newton Democracy is following the law. I have no complains about Newton Democracy.
It’s just Right Size that doing it wrong. They should stop. They should destroy any remaining flyers. They should remove the “donate” buttons from their endorsement pages. And they should return any money they’ve raised for this.
LOCK EM UP ! LOCK EM UP !……..
Greg, if Right Size Newton did not raise funds to give to candidates, it appears they are not legally required to make the very disclosure you cite.
Moreover, it doesn’t seem appropriate for you, and on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, to pre-judge that Right Size Newton violated the law in that regard, and then publicly declare the unproven violation — in an apparent attempt to shut down and silence opposition to the intense development which you and the Chamber appear consistently to push throughout Newton.
@Jim: This has nothing to do with the chamber, which doesn’t endorse candidates and certainly is not printing up glossy four color flyers or funneling money to support them.
It also has nothing to do with silencing opposition. I’ve said repeatidly that I have no problem with the Newton Democracy PAC, which is supporting the same candidates as Right Size, only legally and transparently.
Look, Right Sized messed up. Why do you keep making excuses for them?
Sean – I’ve never seen this community so divided and angry over a political issue. Every candidate who prevails on November 5 will have to figure out how to knit this community back together and it’s not going to be easy.
Jane,
Sure. And, there’s an interesting and important series of discussions about how to mend fences. But, this is a post about an actor in our political system seemingly violating the rules. Adding a both-sides post suggests that following the rules doesn’t matter. That’s upsetting.
@Greg: Curious….since you claim that there is a clear violation, has OCPF responded?Do they agree with your assertion that there is a violation? Have you hired an election attorney that has advised you that there is a violation?Is OCPF going to take action on this matter?
Greg, as I understand, you ARE the President of the Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce and it’s not that there is endorsement of candidates, which you say the Chamber does not do, so much as apparent endeavor to hamper opposition to dense development as Riverside. It seems safe to say that if Newton residents could vote yea or nay on the massive Riverside project, the majority would vote nay, hence the threat of raising unproven criminality to shut down sources of information.
If it was merely a matter of correctable “mess up”, why would you even bother to raise it?
@Sean: Glad you acknowledge that Greg’s accusation is really just that- an accusation. The “rule” that has been cited defines what a political committee is and states:
“In general, organizations that are not political committees may spend money for political purposes, such as contributions to candidates or PACs or expenditures to support or oppose ballot questions, without having to organize as a political committee. That assumes that the group is spending its general funds (such as dues) and has not raised the funds specifically for a political purpose, such as giving to candidates”
I believe Right Size Newton was not formed for the purpose of supporting candidates but was formed to advocate for and encourage development projects and proposals that do not adversely impact the surrounding community.
Amy,
I don’t mind you trying to co-opt my comment to your purposes. It’s even a device I use occasionally.
But, if you’re going to do so, please use language that’s closer to what I wrote. With “seemingly violating rules” I went farther than “accuse.”
Also, the language that you cite (from where?) more or less proves Greg’s point. RSN appears to have “raised … funds specifically for a political purpose.” Contribute button next to endorsement list.
The photo on this thread has been replaced at Amy’s suggestion.
@Jane, I haven’t found myself on the same side of many issues with you but I do appreciate you and your level headedness. I agree with you about a torn apart community but I disagree with you that the councils (both school and town) will have to find a way to knot our community back together after November 5th. As they’ve shown many, many times, this is not their goal. I’ve been watching some candidates gleefully tear others down. I’ve watched their supporters applaud and join in. You (and I!) are naive to think three weeks from now this will be a bad dream. People and candidates think this anger is the new normal. Working together, finding a common ground, looking for a compromise because we are NEIGHBORS, I’m hearing so little of that today. I thought that new civic group on Facebook would be informative, but it’s more of a cesspool than this anonymous board.
This post is click bait. You don’t agree with RSN so they should be accused of illegal activity? Well, I don’t agree with turning Newton into Brighton and there are people running for council seats who clearly think that’s the goal for this town. Can I accuse them of illegal behavior as well and then post it on Facebook and have it easily searched online a week before the election?
BTW, I forgot to mention but the four postcards in the photo (two from Right Sized, one from Rena Getz’ campaign and one from Pam Miller’s campaign) were delivered paper-clipper together as one package.
@Greg: I think it is unfair for you to post the photos of two candidates that were endorsed by Right Size Newton in this post particularly since your problem seems not to be with their candidacy but with the organization (and as I stated above, I think you are wrong and making inflammatory accusations without backup from OCPF).
In any case, I find your posting of photos of these two candidates and the endorsement cards from Right Size Newton – as a deliberate attempt to smear them. Please take it down.
@Amy. I disagree but I respect your perspective and don’t want this to be a distraction. I will replace it right after the baseball game.
I’m getting nostalgic for the leaf blower ban debate.
This headline is so extra.
@Sean: The quote is from the OCPF website – referenced in Greg’s original post.
@Greg did you remove the photos from Twitter?
Such vitriol, @Greg. Tch tch. If you could only hear yourself.
@Rick, excellent point. And what about Facebook? Still there plus a negative comment about one of the pictured candidates.
1. Someone’s afraid of Right Size? Are your overlords (Northland) quaking in their boots?
2. If you feel this strongly, call the cops.
Let’s take a step back and recall why Right Size was formed in the first place. No one is “against development”. It cannot be stopped, no more than Tom Brady can beat Father Time.
IMO, Right Size came together (like the band of rebels in Star Wars) to challenge WHO should determine the future of our city…it’s residents, or corporate outsiders who think their deep pockets, paid for influencers (ahem), bottomless legal budgets, can steam roll public sentiment.
Case in point, the topic of Northlands Traffic plan was a primary topic in the Oct 15th Land Use meeting. The Land Use Committee noted a number of questions and challenges to Northland’s methodologies.
Northland’s Attorney (the official/unofficial lobbyist for any big money entity who needs to buy influence in Newton) posted this little ditty on Friday.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/99736
For those without the time to read, it’s a memo directed at Councilor Laredo (who was most vocal at the Oct 15th Land Use meeting), with essentially two middle fingers up. No compromises. Just a steady confidence that they will get approved regardless.
@Jane, I wish the world was a nicer place.
Happy Sunday, all.
Oh and lastly….has anyone taking a look at those who support Right Size? Been to an Land Use meeting of late and see who is making public comments opposing Northland, Riverside, etc.?
It’s our longest standing citizens. Those who have lived in Newton for decades. People who (supposedly) YEARN to down size into all these luxury apartments. Oh the irony!!!
Greg, do what you gotta do, man. But if it includes locking up Newton’s seniors, hope you can sleep at home.
Correction: sleep at night. 🙂
Very disconcerting to see Trump-style arguments being made on Village 14…
“Maybe it’s illegal, maybe it isn’t. So what?”
Matt/Jim/Pat/Casey:
If you read my post above, I’m doing my best to be fair here.
But I think Right Size Newton has gotten a bit ahead of itself. At the very least, the website doesn’t follow the typical standards that a tax exempt should follow.
Unless it changed overnight, it is not clear what type of 501c they claim to be. Are they a 501c3, with donations tax deductible? Are they a 501c4, allowed to advocate, but subject to rules on fund segregation?
They need to disclose what they are and how individuals should treat their donations on their website. Go look at pretty much any tax exempt with a website.
I think that the website needs to be clearer, that they should post more information that will be required by the IRS is their 1023 is pending (and possibly cause rejection because it is NOT there, either initially or at the 5 year look back), that it isn’t too much to ask about how they paid for this type of thing, and that they should remove the donation tab from the candidate endorsement tab.
Finally, there are reasons others on both sides formed PACs. Just because you don’t like Greg ‘s message doesn’t mean he is wrong on the substance.
So free advice as a fellow Newton neighbor…someone from Right Side should consult a tax exempt lawyer. These aren’t difficult questions and the legal work is often pro bono.
And it would be very helpful to know what type of tax exempt they claim to be. Even if they want to skirt the rules for this election, the IRS and the Commonwealth tend to follow up and track this stuff. Best to be on the “right” side of life. (Life of Brian anyone?)
Is Simon reading this thread? Didn’t Opt Out form a PAC? Perhaps either of the two existing PACs could enlighten us as to why they did so.
I’m not a PAC expert by any length or means. But I do work with tax exempts, and they tend to be very careful about all of this, and the ones that have 501c4s are even more so. I believe there is some personal liability to the tax exempt managers if they mess this up financially, since funds are subject to tax. I may be confusing the foundation rules with these rules, but the IRS website has a bunch of very long and very boring guides to this stuff.
Or maybe Right Size should just be a voluntary association. I wonder why they are organized as any type of 501c…
Ok, enough from me. Hope more info comes to light.
If Northand’s and Greg’s goal is to distract us from the main issue. Congrats.
Luxury apartments should be the lowest percentage of any development proposal, not the highest. Instead, we should have the type of units needed in Newton: smaller (less bedrooms/less expensive); affordable, condos.
A realistic Traffic plan to deal with the added density.
An admission and funding to support the increased enrollment in schools that added households will bring.
More business tax revenue vs residential – to offset the huge and growing fiscal gap in Newton.
MEANWHILE, we continue to bicker amongst ourselves while Northland sits back and laughs.
@Matt: We get it. You’re an ends justifies the means type of guy.
At least you’re being transparent.
Not the phrase I would use but we can agree to disagree.
Greg’s post brings up some very real and very specific legal issues. Without a doubt the tone of it, particularly the list of demands, was over-the-top and did have an “I’ve gotcha now’ feel to it.
As @Fignewtonville points out these very real issues can and should be readily sorted out by the organization. So far the majority of responses are all of the shoot-the-messenger flavor rather than shedding any light or describing a way forward to put the group on solid legal ground … or introducing additional information to help clear this up.
I’d love to see something short and clear from the organization …
* Here’s what our tax/legal status is (501(c)3,4 etc)
* Here’s why we believe there’s no legal issues and Greg has his facts wrong
OR
* We weren’t aware of these issues. Now we are and here’s how we’ll sort them out. Thanks Greg for helping to keep us in compliance with the all the at times confusing laws and regulations.
Once done we can all get back to wrestling over how many housing units and what kind of traffic mitigation these big projects need,
And Greg, what are you? You keep adding and changing this post without notations. Adding pictures, removing pictures. Adding notes, removing notes. You’re certainly enjoying the fact that this is a “post” and not vetted news that needs to follow any guidelines. This post has changed at least four times since the original. And yet the original post with the candidates pictures has been shared on Facebook and has a negative comment. Pot, kettle.
So this is the first time I’ve been criticized for toning down my rhetoric!
Yes, I’m guilty of listening to people who said my original post was too harsh and the photo was unfair. I modified this post after Amy gave me some feedback both here and offline that I took to heart.
Guilty as charged for taking to heart input from people who I don’t always agree with politically but respect personally.
As for Facebook and Twitter, those posts were removed too. (I’m not sure I have any control over posts that have been shared.) If you’re still seeing them, maybe clear your cache?
I am saddened by the lack of professionalism and civility on this blog, village14.com. I attended the recent debates and observed the same behavior by some of the candidates – rude and condescending. Let’s bring dignity and civility back into Newton politics. Some folks want major development and others want more moderate development that is the question from my viewpoint.
Rightsize Newton is clearly violating campaign laws. Matt Lai and others on this thread: “but what about her emails?”
We can disagree on issues but not on this one. If RSN broke the law, they should be held accountable and work quickly to rectify the situation.
Jerry, my guess is that someone confused state tax exempt with federal tax exempt. Happens frequently.
I will say that the folks running the group should correct it one way or the other.
To Matt, no one goes to jail for this stuff, but the folks running the group can be fined or taxed under the right circumstances. Nonprofits spend a lot of time thinking about this. Others on both sides of the debate did as well, we just had a whole discussion about competing PACS.
Jerry, I doubt they will be thanking Greg either way. 😉 lol.
I also find one thing laughable. Does anyone actually read the mailers anymore? I’ve got a big pile by my door. My youngest uses them as confetti for stuffed animal parades.
I archived this particular page this morning when I read it. You can do that here
https://web.archive.org/
Whatever has changed since then can be compared.
Let’s all take a deep breath and look at the 411.
RightSize Newton, Inc. (RSN) is a Massachusetts corporation organized in March 2019 as a charitable organization under Mass. Gen Laws ch. 180.
RSN is not listed in the charitable organization databases of either the Internal Revenue Service or the Massachusetts Attorney General. If RSN has been raising money without first obtaining a tax identification number, that could have legal consequences and result in possible exposure to liability.
RSN does not appear in the database of Political Action Committees registered with the Massachusetts Office for Campaign and Political Finance, nor on the list of local political committees that have filed with the Elections department in Newton. If RSN has not registered as a PAC or local political action committee, this, too, could have legal consequences and result in possible exposure to liability.
If RSN has been raising and expending funds on behalf of municipal candidates without having obtained a tax identification number or filed with the appropriate agency as a political action committee, this would have additional legal consequences under the Massachusetts Campaign Finance laws.
I am looking forward to hearing more from RSN’s organizers about these issues.
Years ago I was part of a 501c4 – a designation that permits more in the way of advocacy than a 501c3.
We had money in our treasury and sought to support a group of candidates that best aligned with our mission. We consulted with the OCPF and were told that we could not expend that money to endorse a slate and that we needed to form a PAC and collect funds for that specific purpose. The goal of OCPF is transparency. Who is telling me to vote in a certain way? Who donated to this effort and how much? How did they expend funds?
I’m sure that Right Size Newton did not intentionally run afoul of the complicated rules. Nevertheless, they needed to form a PAC in order to endorse a slate.
@Greg, you modified the post more than one time. Like I said, the title has gone through several iterations and so have the photographs. Facebook and Twitter don’t support “caching”. You removed them after I posted. Thanks for doing that, but damage has been done with this trial balloon, inflammatory type of “reporting”. Was it worth it to lose so much credibility in such a short amount of time among your neighbors?
@Casey: You clearly have done a great job studying the national political playbook that calls for blaming the messenger as a way of avoiding the main issue. (“What about Hillary’s emails?” “But Benghazi!” “But the process!”)
Ted Hess Mahan just did a much better job laying out how Right Size appears to be in violation than I have.
What do you have to say about that?
In the long run we’ll find out.
But what’s odd, a bit is that this link
https://www.ocpf.us/Reports/DisplayReport?id=11954&isIndependentSpendingReport=true
Shows the expenditures.
To get an account with the OCPF you have to submit your founding documents before they give you a password. ( I read on their website somewhere ) So, whatever entity type they are, OCPF knows it. So, why would they allow an entity that cannot make contributions / expenditures on a candidate to register?
Just wondering.
Rick, are you suggesting or implying RSN may be innocent as charged (by Greg and Ted)?
WHEW, so we don’t have to LOCK EM UP! (over that massive total $1,242.65).
@Greg, see this is where we differ. I think you have done the job of studying the national playbook and you don’t like that the conversation is focused on you and not on RSN. You dropped an inflammatory headline with photos that could take votes away from candidates in an election where few voters are expected. Your “facts” (Benghazi!) are contestable and the opposition (Crooked Hilary?) is a group of your neighbors that’s opposed to a big developer having more say than the average taxpayer and voter in this community. You are free to disagree with my latter point, and I’m sure you do, but don’t compare yourself with the victimized press when you don’t follow the rules of journalists. You changed the headline too many times without noting it to get that credit.
You’re not the messenger if you created a message and then changed it when you didn’t get the response you expected.
So Casey I see that your final answer is “yes I’m going to try and distract this conversation away from Right Size in any way I can.”
Have a great day!
@Rick, there is at least one odd thing about RSN’s summary independent expenditure report. The webpage contains a a link to “Export to PDF.” When I clicked on the link, it brought me to a campaign finance report for State Representative Robert M. Koczera for the third quarter of 2002.
The other thing that is odd is that RSN’s report is filed with the OCPF. The page to register and file independent expenditure reports says that such reports for organizations supporting local candidates should be filed with the local authority. As I noted above, RSN has not filed anything with the Newton Elections Department, to my knowledge.
OCPF’s webpage also says that M.G.L. Chapter 55, Section 1 defines an independent expenditure as “an expenditure made or liability incurred by an individual, group, association, corporation, labor union, political committee or other entity as payment for goods or services to expressly advocate the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate; provided, however, that the expenditure is made or incurred without cooperation or consultation with any candidate or a nonelected political committee organized on behalf of the candidate or an agent of the candidate and is not made or incurred in concert with or at the request or suggestion of the candidate, a nonelected political committee organized on behalf of the candidate or agent of the candidate.”
@Jim, RSN should still be concerned if it failed to obtain a tax identification number (and/or tax exempt status) from the IRS.
Casey and Jim:
I honestly don’t think RSN is doing everything by the book, at least on their website. They should clean that up post haste. If you describe yourself as a nonprofit and solicit donations on your website, you need to provide more information as to what type of nonprofit and the tax treatment of the funds donated.
What I can see online doesn’t match the practices of the other tax exempts I’ve worked with, or the 501c4s specifically. I’m not a true expert on this, but I know more than most I think.
As some have posted, this can be cleaned up with further information, or further filings. And they should clean it up, so it doesn’t distract from their message, and in a worse case, subject a well meaning person on their board to personal financial liability. (worst case, unlikely but possible).
Anyway, enough on this from me. Especially since the mailings/cards dropped off at my door are a pointless expenditure.
Is it possible to be intellectually consistent to want RSN to do better with paperwork and follow the rules, but also think that this isn’t that big a deal once it is fixed?
Ted, IRS status was NOT the subject of this thread or Greg’s criminal charges against RSN.
In any case, I guess you can now proceed to convey to the IRS the possible “to be concerned about” tax matter for investigation and then collect your 15% reward under 26 USC § 7623 on any taxes which may be owing and recovered (if any) on the $1,242.65 reportedly collected and disbursed by RSN.
Greg, this is a BIG deal indeed. Thanks for taking the time to post and engage Newton V14 readers.
I agree with Greg that campaign finance laws are important and that Right Size Newton’s flyers probably cross the line (intentionally or otherwise). I hope they will rectify that.
However, I also think that complaints to the OCPF on relatively minor infractions are often used as a campaign tactic to silence free speech. I recently distributed about 100 letters printed from my home computer and sent notes to email addresses I had gathered during a previous campaign, and got multiple anonymous complaints sent to the OCPF. It never occurred to me that I could not do that. The OCPF informed me that I needed to form a PAC to do anything like that, set up a separate bank account, do twice monthly reporting, etc. to report the $2 I spent on printing flyers from my printer. Needless to say, I said $#^$& that, and just quit campaigning for that candidate, which is exactly what the anonymous callers wanted me to do.
I think we need to have a little balance between promoting transparency and trying to squelch free speech.
@Greg — I’m confused here. RSN seems to have an Massachusetts OCPF filing in place that enumerates the benefit to candidates of their expenditures for their flyers that predates your post? Your original post implied they were disregarding/oblivious to all rules and had never heard of OCPF? Seems you just didn’t have the whole picture and jumped the gun? Seems like their intent was pretty good having a filing in place, whether they got it all right or not.
https://www.ocpf.us/Reports/DisplayReport?id=11954&isIndependentSpendingReport=true
With regard to the chamber, you state the chamber isn’t allowed to endorse candidates? Do you support/contribute to/maintain V14 on your own personal time, while on chamber payroll, or a mix?
@Ted well that sounds like a software defect. In any event, I read on the web site that you would get a login after you submitted your organizational documents, so I assume OCPF has that info somewhere.
IDK, Rick. All RSN had to do to register and file an independent expenditure report with OCPF was give an email address, the name of the organization, and a password. And, unlike the other organizations filing independent expenditure reports with OCPF, RSN has no tax ID number that I can find, which usually indicates it does not have a tax exempt status. Could be trouble for RSN.
Now that I have read all the comments on this post, I have come away with very few conclusions.
1. RSN could be in trouble legally.
2. Several commenters think breaking the law doesn’t matter if they agree with Right Size. Seems to be a new rule since the current national administration has been in office. (Here’s hoping it will change back!)
3. Ted Hess-Mahan is still the best explainer of rules ever.
What Marti said.
Especially #3
Greg-
Why do you insist on referring to Rightsize as “anti-development?” No one is calling the chamber “anti-resident.”
I’m pro residents. In fact, I support having more residents. We have a housing crisis in Massachusetts that is impacting our ability to fill jobs, be competitive and support our local merchants. It is also forcing our children and young families to move further and further from their jobs, which is contributing to the generation of greenhouse gas and congestion.
Greg, I don’t feel that the majority, by a long shot, of Newtonites actually desire to live in the congestion which you would endeavor to foist upon us (in the name of climate change, reversal of housing patterns, or whatever).
I don’t know anyone who is advocating for reckless growth.
We have opportunities in Newton to take underdeveloped, ugly parcels like the Northland parcels and Riverside station and create vibrant walkable communities that will provide homes for our seniors, millennials and young families, while making a positive contribution to our tax base.
We can do this and we can do this right.
@greg, we often do not see eye to eye on the tactical execution but speaking personally (not on behalf of RSN or anyone else)….
I DO agree with your statement above – the housing crisis in Massachusetts is clear. And as a city, we do want to support our local merchants, as well as allow for more workforce housing.
Where we differ is on who is responsible for ensuring the added density is a benefit and not a detriment to the City of NEWTON.
IMO, the burden of proof lies with the developer, in the form of financial contributions to address the traffic issues and increased school enrollment that density innately generates.
As Mayor Fuller noted, Newton is in a growing budget deficit. To ask its citizens to deal with and fund traffic and school implications in the form of an override will be a tough sell.
@Matt: Actually agree completely. I think the city council land use committee did a great job negotiating community benefits for Austin Street and Washington Place and I like the direction the Northland process is headed with free to the public electric shuttle buses, money for Countryside, the splash park the community asked for, passive use homes and millions in traffic mitigation. These are things the council asked for after listening to the community at public meetings and they’re going to make this project and Newton better.
I’m not disputing the need for housing at all. I’m just saying using unnecessarily confrontational and inaccuratew terms such as “anti-development” is counterproductive. It also greatly discredits your arguments.
When I see someone labeling a group of concerned neighbors “anti-development” group, I stop reading. I assume that the argument the writer is making is purposely sensationalistic. If you have a strong argument for why Right Size Riverside should not be trying to influence such a large development in their neighborhood, make it. But, simply saying “anti-development” is a inaccurate and offensive.
I also never said you were “anti-resident.” What I meant was that it is the counter term to “anti-development,” and no one is leveling it against the chamber. Therefore, you should not level it against a neighborhood group.
@Christine: So what term do you recommend?
@greg, now we’re getting somewhere!!!
The Land Use committee asked some great questions at the Oct 15 meeting. Unfortunately NND came back with more excuses as to why their plan is sufficient and should not change. Tomorrow evening’s Land Use meeting should be interesting to see how that shakes out.
According to the MA DOE site, the cost per student in Newton sits around $18k/per student/per year.
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/ppx.aspx
The $1.5m NND proposed for Countryside is nice start but not enough, as it only funds 83 additional students, for ONE YEAR. Here’s hoping Land Use and the Council can leverage these numbers and realities for a greater contribution by the Developer.
Sorry for posting twice. I didn’t think the first comment went through.
How about “neighborhood group,” “concerned neighbors,” even “very active neighborhood organization.” I live very close to Riverside, and have been active and attending meetings. I am notanti-development. Anti-development is not even a thing.
I get where you’re coming from. But we also have many residents who are concerned about climate change from sprawl, or where they will live when they get older, or where their kids will live. These folks are active with groups like Livable Newton, Engine 6 and Green Newton and they favor these projects. So it feels to me like they’re pro and, by default, the other groups are con, yes?
I’m not trying to give you a hard time. I’m really looking for a suggestion that fits. Just saying “concerned” doesn’t explain it.
“development skeptic”
There are people concerned about climate change who live all over the city. All people concerned about climate change are not pro-development. They are just that – concerned about climate change. Those poeple may be advocating for a large, dense development, but you don’t call them pro-congestion.
They are not separate from the Riverside neighbors. You can simply call them Lower Falls Neighborhood Activists. Calling them “anti-development” is simply inaccurate.
But Right Size Newton is a city wide group, not just Riverside. (LIFA seems to be a Riverside only group) And as far as I can tell RSN as a group doesn’t support Riverside as proposed, Northland as proposed, Washington Street’s various projects as proposed and the developments since taken off the table next to Mount Ida.
What do all these projects have in common? They’re developments.
And what has RSN’s position been on every single one? They’re against them.
How is that not best described “anti” development.
Also at both the Riverside and Northland public hearings we’ve heard from a number of neighbors who enthusiastically support these projects. So you’re right, not all neighbors are anti-development, but it does seem that Right Size Newton is.
@Greg: So does this mean if you don’t support a proposal as proposed that makes you automatically – anti-development and anti-housing? So – if say, you’d prefer a scaled down version of an original developer’s proposal – that meets your definition of someone who is anti-development/anti-housing?
Amy: I admitted I’m struggling with the right term too.
And yet the one consistent characteristic of RSN seems to be that they object to every proposal.
So do we call them the anti-every proposal group?
Wouldn’t it be fair to call them anti-developER?
Somebody has to do the hard work of grinding down the profits of the developers to the benefit of all of the residents, and our elected officials don’t seem inclined to do it.
@Greg: No – we don’t need to label any group or organization. They are what they are – they stand for what they stand for. I mean – let’s face it – there are certainly folks in our community that have objected to proposals:
Cabot, Cabot and Forbes proposal to put housing at Wells Ave was voted down by almost every City Councilor
The B’nai B’rith Housing Development in Chestnut Hill was drastically reduced in size by our very own Mayor Fuller
Shall we now refer to all of these people as the anti-development/anti-housing/racist Councilors and Mayor?
I think we ought not feed into the already divisive nature of national politics that we have today and allow it to trickle down and seep into our local politics.
Well, seeing as the LFIA agreed to the latest proposal for a million sq feet of space to be developed in their neighborhood, I guess they’re not “anti-development,” but want a say in what happens in their neighborhood like EVERYONE does. What do you know?
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2019/10/28/neighbors-developer-reach-long-awaited-accord-riverside-project-newton/O8ttH3lZA4sqMrFC881l4J/story.html?event=event25&fbclid=IwAR0LdaexiqZ1Zl-32wuKYO4jgTowa3iM-JDbCc1GlbKQgd-9eR3gmIi-T90
What do I know? I know that is a really positive step and I commend everyone who has worked to get us to this place.