A referendum to decide the fate of the Northland project will go before Newton voters on March 3, the city council decided Tuesday.
The 21 to 1 vote (with Councilor Markiewicz the only no vote and Councilors Ciccone and Grossman absent) follows an effort to thwart the March 3 date by Councilor Norton the four others earlier this month.
Before agreeing to the March 3 date, Councilor Baker proposed holding the vote on April 7 but the measure was defeated 14-8.
Shenanigans chartered, common sense prevails.
Greg, in the future when you post can you disclose your employer and note if any people or companies you reference are financial sponsors? This would really help with transparency.
For example,
Disclosure: Greg Reibman is the President of the Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce of which Northland Investment Corporation is a financial sponsor.
Thank you.
@David: Always interesting to get a request for transparency from an anonymous participant. Click on my name on this or any comment and you’ll see it leads to the Chamber’s website. Also, my chamber affiliation is listed clearly in the “about” section in the menu bar above. And yes, Northland and 900 area businesses and nonprofits (including our hospitals, colleges, food pantries, etc.) are chamber members.
Greg, if everyone knows then there’s no harm in repeating it : )
My thoughts are my own; no one pays me to comment here.
I’m also just occasionally commenting whereas you’re been posting lengthy commentaries favoring Northland for years–so far two today on the same topic.
@David it’s easy for you to say that your comments are your own and no one pays you, but without your real name or some kind of identifiable information, it’s hard to know that. I have no confirmation that’s true, other than your word. And since I don’t know who you are, I can’t trust that.
I’m OK taking anonymous comments for what they’re worth. But please don’t ask for more transparency from people who already offer it when you aren’t willing to offer it yourself.
Chuck, if you and Greg are going to write headlining opinions about a paying member of your organization then you have an ethical duty to disclose the financial relationship in the article itself.
Readers should certainly be aware anonymous commentators could have ulterior motives as well. However, the mere potential for other ethical transgressions does not absolve you of your ethical duty to disclose a conflict.
@David please update your listings. I no longer work for the Chamber.
David M,
Did greg use to be a journalist? If so, the lack of disclaimer at the beginning or end of the post is inexcusable
A comment saying Northland would result in “more crime” has been removed. Either back up statements with data or don’t state things you can’t substantiate as a fact.
@Greg, if you eliminate unsubstantiated claims from these threads, not much will be left!
The comment you removed was not only uninformed and mean-spirited, but also bigoted, suggesting that an unnamed group would move here and mug us on Needham Street. I believe I saw the same irrational claim, probably from the same author, in a recent letter to the Tab. I wonder which group he fears?