Pending the expected results of the November election between Jake Auchincloss and Republican Julie Hall of Attleboro in November, it’s likely Newton will have an open seat for an at-large candidate from Ward 2.
Who’s running? Who would you like to see run?
Bryan Barash!
Bryan Barash.
Or Jerry. Jerry should run for everything. Just have him move. He’ll do it.
NOT Bryan Barash. That would be a serious downgrade from Jake Auchincloss.
Kathy Winters: a balanced, thoughtful, smart, pragmatic, engaged listener who could build the bridges we desperately need right now.
Had it not been for an ill-conceived write-in attempt in Ward 5, she would be serving on City Council today.
Run Kathy, Run!
It has to be a resident of ward 2, right? Some of the people mentioned above are not.
Bryan Barash
I would like to hear some recommendations from Emily Norton and Susan Albright.
I am not enough of a Newton Insider to know who the options might be who reside in Ward 2
It would be nice to see Bryan Barash join us on the City Council if there is a special election, particularly given his ability to navigate Beacon Hill and get state help for the City of Newton during these challenging times. That’s a very practical asset at the moment for any prospective City Councilor.
Claire, not to speak for her, but I think Emily previously spoke up on behalf of Tarik Lucas on a different thread. Tarik and I don’t agree on everything, but I’m sure he’d be an excellent city councilor if he decided to run again.
(Jake and I didn’t agree on everything either. That happens a lot in my life)
For folks getting excited for their favorite Newton characters, please remember that this is a Ward 2 seat, even if at-large. If anyone would like to buy my house to run…
Fig, I didn’t say anything negative about Tarik. Or are you saying Emily suggested him? I would consider him but Tarik and Bryan aren’t fresh voices. There must be some additional potential options that live in Ward 2
Attorney Bryan Barash Please! He’s able to get Newton state funds.
Not only that but I know a guy who knows a gal who says he’s running.
In this age of social justice, BLM and increased awareness of the privileges some but not all of us enjoy, I’d frankly prefer to have some new fresh faces on the city council that reflect not who the city is, but who we want it to be.
Let’s have some voices that aren’t already very well represented on the CC.
Claire:
I was just saying Emily suggested him in another post. Wasn’t directed at you at all.
As for fresh options, have you met my friend Jerry? Certified fresh that one! Quite the saucy nub!
I’m all in with Tarik Lucas if he decides to throw his hat in the ring. I hope he will. Tarik is credible, disciplined, fearless and totally believable. A year or so ago, Tarik was the recipient of a thoroughly misguided critique claiming he should be marching in lockstep with Newton’s development plans simply because of his status as an African American resident of this City. His passionate, thoughtful and deeply personal rejoinder was simply the most powerful and best written piece I have ever read on this blog. It reflected the independent leadership and courage we’ve come to expect from this thoroughly decent and principled man.
Hey Figgy, cut that out
Sorry Jerry. Too much sugar today.
Bob Burke can you post a link the the referenced essay/blog written by Tarik?
Claire. Wow….. I can’t recall when Tarik actually posted his response and whether it was a full post or a comment. I also have no idea how to find it in the Village 14 “archives”.
Nothing against straight, binary, cisgender, white men, but if Newton is truly interested in diversity, it would be a huge missed opportunity if we didn’t actively seek representation by someone a little (or a lot) different from the 23. A great failure in fact, given the state of the world. I hear a lot of people in Newton talking the talk; let’s see them walk the walk.
I’m with Michael. We need fresh, diverse voices on the council. I’m still salty that Tarik and Carolina lost last year. Maybe Tarik can run again. I don’t doubt Bryan Barash’s devotion to this city, but we don’t need another white man’s voice.
I was so impressed with Tarik Lucas when he last ran. Clear thinking, kind, and well informed. I would like to think that he would work with the residents of Newton and be responsive to their concerns. Please run again, Tarik!
I’ve never met Tarik Lucas. I’ll bet he’s great. I appreciate his leadership, and I’d guess that we agree on most subjects. But for city council, I simply can’t vote for someone whose campaign in 2019 was based essentially entirely on opposing mixed-use development: https://patch.com/massachusetts/newton/newton-candidate-profile-tarik-lucas-large-councilor-ward-2
Tarik, please run. I regret not contributing to your campaign last time.
Tarik Lucas. Time to see if all the talk about “systemic racism”, and “the fierce urgency of this moment” is more than just talk. This is where the rubber meets the road.
My guess is the “deeply concerned” folks in our city will elect Bryan Barash another white lawyer working in the state house to represent ward 2. Count on it. Strictly status quo in this race.
It will be a missed opportunity.
Tarik Lucas would be an excellent addition to the City Council.
@Claire: I’m pretty sure this is the V14 comment by Tarik that Bob was referring to.
This was the comment by Tarik that I was referring to.
Claire: Thank you for inquiring about it.
Bruce. Thank you for finding it.
The worst thing that could happen would be if this were not a contested election.
I seldom agree with you Greg, but I agree on this.
I have been thinking about it and a match up between Tarik and Bryan would be very interesting. In my opinion, it would be a referendum in zoning. I’ve heard some people assert that Newton residents bust be supportive of the pro-development forces on CC because otherwise they wouldn’t elected them.
But I think there is a sleeping bear and it has been poke and voters will be paying much more attention that they did with Northland and Riverside.
In reading Tarik’s post that was reposted by Bruce it is clear he isn’t anti-development but his is for transparency and opposed to sweetheart deals that favor developers. I believe his message will resonate beyond the echo chamber that is Village 14. I really hope he decides to run. And if not Tarik, some other voice that is more broadly representative than Bryan’s.
A point of clarification: Bryan identifies as bi-sexual, so electing Bryan would add an additional LBGTQ voice to the Council.
Greg and Claire,
I can think of a lot of worse outcomes than an uncontested election.
Claire,
The numbers don’t exactly support your assertion that Tarik is more broadly representative. This will be a city-wide race. Tarik ran a good campaign, but was more than 2,456 votes behind the second-place vote getter in his race. His vote total was less than all of the winners in the election, by over 1,500 votes, with one exception. The one exception is Pam Wright, the at-large incumbent who arguably is closest to Tarik’s profile, who had the fewest votes of any of the winners, by over 500 votes. By comparison, the losing candidate with the hightest vote total, outpolled two winners.
Tarik wasn’t even the biggest vote-getter among those who failed to win a seat. He was tied for third.
We can (sorta) apply apples-to-apples, looking at the votes in the wards Tarik and Bryan had in common: the Ward 2 precincts. The ward numbers are not a perfect comparison. Obviously, in a ward race, Bryan invested more energy appealing for votes in the ward than Tarik presumably did. Nonetheless, Tarik earned 278 votes fewer than Bryan in the Ward 2 wards (1313 v. 1035). By comparison, Bryan was only 94 votes behind Emily Norton.
Finally, Tarik and Bryan were on opposite sides of the lopsided Northland vote, with Bryan a clear Yes supporter, along with the overwhelming majority of voters 58% to 42%.
Without getting into their merits as candidates (and, I should note, between the two of them, I’m a Bryan supporter), it’s tough to see how Tarik is more broadly representative.
Sean, you really are tone deaf. You are talking history. A history when the average Newton voter really wasn’t paying attention or aware of the city’s intent on regards to zoning. The new zoning will impact the entire city in a way that Northland and Riverside didn’t and people are taking notice. Tarik’s position of more moderation and transparency would be very compelling.
@Sean-
There are currently ZERO people of color on the city council.
The election for this seat will provide clarity on whether the messages from the last 4 months have sunk in here in
“Progressive” Newton or not.
@Paul – come on, you know that’s a ridiculous argument to make.
Does the city council need more BIPOC representation? Absolutely. Does that mean the “progressive” thing to do is just elect any person of color? Of course not.
Increasing representation in elected office is incredibly important, but when there are stark policy differences those policies clearly take precedence. Tarik Lucas is someone who I (and I’m sure many other Newtonites) strongly disagree with on many key issues, so there’s no way he will get my vote.
Based on your logic it seems you’d decry someone as anti-feminist unless they voted for both McCain-Palin and Clinton-Kaine, since both tickets would’ve increased female representation in higher office. (As an example of when voting for increased representation makes sense, see Pressley vs Capuano. Little difference on policy, so then it makes sense to increase diversity in Congress)
I believe, put simply, the Tarik Lucas versus Bryan Barash Election is about zoning. Zoning is the biggest issue on the Newton City Council’s agenda.
I think the zoning question is about 6 story buildings versus 3-4 story buildings. It is has been misrepresented as a pro-development versus anti-development, which I feel is not accurate.
To date, the larger developments have been built in Newtonville (Austin Street & Washington Place). Next developments are Dunstan Street West (West Newton), Riverside (Newton Upper Falls), Needham Street/Northland (Newton Lower Falls). I’m not sure of the status of Riverdale/Charles River (Nonantum) project. To come: Dunstan Street East (West Newton) and more buildings on Washington Street in Newtonville owned by Mark Development. Do you know of any other large developments in the works? If so, please share. I have heard of some smaller new projects in Newtonville.
I think that Newton residents are starting to understand the fast changes in the physical space in Newton and I hope that voters show up on March 16th to vote.
My vote is to slow things down and see what the impacts of the approved developments are on Newton’s infrastructure: schools, roads, parking, traffic and noise pollution. I think most people would agree we need better affordable public transportation, especially with the commuter train.
I also think that both sides need to LISTEN to one another. I feel like there is a “my way or the highway” attitude in Newton. I also believe that folks feel differently depending on where they live in Newton, because to date large areas of Newton are not being directly impacted by these developments.
West newtoner
You also need to be aware of the new MA state law passed which requires multifamily zoning 0.5 mile from MBTA stop (commuter rail or T)
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/massachusetts-makes-broad-changes-to-zoning-act
This gives any pro density council wide coverage to take it to the absolute max
@West Newtoner, I agree. Most of our councilors fall into a fairly narrow political spectrum (center-left to progressive), leaving housing as one of the few differentiating issues. I have no idea if the tide is beginning to turn against mixed-use development. I’ve seen no sign of it thus far in our elections. I personally think the city would be better off with more housing, including near me in Newton Highlands. I’ll cast my vote (for Mr. Barash) and wish, more than anything, for a clean campaign (including on V14) and a strong turn-out.
Bugek, As I read it, the language is not quite as broad as you imply. The article says:
The new section states that each of these municipalities “shall have a zoning ordinance or by-law that provides for at least 1 district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right.”
The zoning district must be “0.5 miles from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station, if applicable.”
I’m guessing that the term “of reasonable size” will provoke lots of debate, no?
Paul,
The term “reasonable” will definitely have different meanings if the council
leans
pro-density(aka social justice warriors)
Or leans more
“measured-density”
Its bizarre that a law designed to increase density used the term “reasonable” rather than a percentage… one more thing for residents to argue over.