Most city councilors are Democrats, and nearly all agree on matters of national and even state policy. Locally, the Progressives are keen on the promotion of alternative energy, cycling, and high-density development like Northland and Riverside. This faction mostly supported the unsuccessful Charter Commission reform effort in hopes of creating a smaller, more efficient, city-wide Council. The Preservationists led the effort against it to preserve a larger council with more neighborhood input. Both factions express support for moderate-income housing, but the Progressives believe it can best be achieved through building large developments with set-asides and instituting zoning reform to expand the city’s number of housing units. The Preservationists distrust the developers and fear that if Newton grows too fast it will lose its neighborhood character. Some of the Preservationists supported the unsuccessful effort to put the brakes on the Tear-down/McMansion movement. Both factions, I might add, deplore the sorry state of regional public transit and seek improvements in commuter rail and MBTA service.
It doesn’t surprise me that someone like the puzzled emailer above was confused by the partisanship of the current campaign. Some Progressives label anyone who objects to any development or proposed zoning reform a Nimby. Some Preservationists act aggrieved, imagining that the “radical” proposals of the Progressives will destroy neighborhoods and ruin their traditional way of life. Suddenly, it’s unacceptable that someone has qualms about Columbus’s colonizing legacy, while others find it unacceptable to express fears that over-development might lead to traffic congestion and overcrowding in schools. We all have the responsibility to debate one another over public policy, but throwing around epithets like “Nimby” and “radical” discourages discourse and ends debate. In my youth, I considered myself a radical, and these days most Americans would call me a progressive. But the way these terms are employed in Newton gives me pause.
I have great respect for members of the City Council, having watched them at many a committee and plenary session over the years. No councilor ever took on the office for the salary. Over the last month I got to exchange ideas with all five city council candidates when each met with the steering committee of Bike Newton, on which I serve. All seemed admirable and committed to public service. A passionate environmentalist, I often find myself working with the Progressives on issues like improving bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure around the city. Some members of both factions are rallying to the cause of rehabilitating the parks and preserving Newton’s green spaces. But factions are not for me. Whichever candidates win the special election, let’s hope the rival groups work together whenever possible to bring needed improvements to life in the Garden City. They surely have more in common than they apparently acknowledge.
+1!
Like!
I don’t think these candidates running together does any of them any favors, except potentially in fundraising and campaign efficiency. Instead of carving out their own identities, it’s just an us vs. them like we see in party-driven politics at the state and national level. I’m sure in reality there’s a complicated Venn diagram where everyone running agrees on some things and doesn’t on others in a far more nuanced and complicated way, but the slate approach takes that kind of thoughtful consideration off the table.
I also fear that this might set a really bad precedent for our “regular” municipal elections. If everyone starts teaming up we might as well just make our local elections partisan affairs with party platforms and primaries and the like, which will lead to even more “Save Nonantum”-like nonsense bringing even more ugliness to what should be a fairly civil affair.
Do we really need the Newton NIMBYs vs. the Garden City Greens vs. the Thompsonville Tax-Haters?
JustAnotherNewtonian…Your point is well taken and I’m totally with you on your concerns, but slate campaigning has been going on for a long time in the city. It’s just a little more obvious now, perhaps because of the relatively short duration of the campaigns.
Newton politics have become as toxic and polarized as national politics, with a peculiar dividing line drawn around housing development. It’s a shame, because there’s a lot more that voters and candidates care about. I wonder if neighboring towns have similar dynamics in their own spheres.
Bob, you do a great job of summing up something I’ve been thinking about for a while now. You also did it in a way that is much more even than something I could write. Thank you.
@Bob, although I find V14 really useful and informative, it clearly contributes to the factionalism you describe. I think this is a property of how our collective sets of brains respond to social media. Most of our councilors and candidates on both sides of the divide do not take the bait when goaded on these pages, and I think they are wise to hold their fire.
I believe the difference between the current slates goes much deeper than particular issues.
One wants to LISTEN, SERVE and REPRESENT their constituents. Their personal ambitions don’t seem to expand far outside of Newton.
The other wants to TEACH their neighbors lessons they find in their rigid ideological script. They won’t accept somebody who feels that high housing density lowers their quality of life. They will lecture police on when they should draw a weapon. They like to be called progressives, but you won’t find wealth inequality or progressive tax among their concerns. Actually, in a conflict between the big money and the citizens they happen to be on the side of the former.
I agree with every word in the article. I already voted and “split” the pairs. I want healthy discussion in the council. My focus is on walkability in Newton. But this issue connects to environmental concerns which connects to bike safety and public transportation.
What teams have the unions in town backed? Zilles and Tachers are for Barash and Ranalli.
What about:
Police? Fire? Custodians?
@bob – this is perhaps the most accurate and neutral I’ve seen in a very long time….ALMOST
Preservationist is an unfair term IMO. No one expects time to stand still. The “faction” that you’ve given this unflattering terms prefers to approach change in a more MODERATE and careful pace. Evolution vs revolution. I wounded what would be a more appropriate term? Hmm….
Thanks, Matt. Not my invention, however: I heard the term “Preservationist” from a few holding the view, but neither “Progressive” or “Preservationist” truly fits. No pejorative sense need attend either title.
Splitting the pairs was on my mind weeks ago because I sensed the imbalance. Then I decided to go with 2 candidates for different reasons that were of the same pair. Now I am not sure given this divisiveness. Thank you.
I appreciate the point Bob is trying to make here, but I think the reality is more muddled. What some folks see as factions, I see loose coalitions, filled with many of neighbors. And the reality is that Bryan or Tarik/Maddy or John are just going to be 2 of 24. The election makes the divide seem bigger than it is, and the public forums bring the factionalism to a higher pitch. But the Mayor has run and governed like a centrist, and I don’t view Susan Albright as progressive in the same wing as Councilor Humphrey or Bryan/Maddy.
We can make up categories and factions if you want, but the only issue where I see consistency among those factions is zoning/development. And even then, not so much. And with the new law changes this year, I don’t even think the supermajority is as “important” as it used to be. There are always true believers in every election for every candidate. But without a strong newspaper, what really drives folks to support a candidate in a local election is one to one interaction, organized campaigning, meet and greets, and neighbors advising neighbors. The fact that like-minded folks on certain issues band together to support candidates that agree with them isn’t a negative for either side, and unlike the overheated rhetoric on this thread, the vast vast majority of folks voting for these candidates don’t fit into either faction, aren’t trying to vote for preservation or progressive in the way you have defined them, and the candidates won’t function that way once in office.
@fignewton, can you elaborate on the changes in the law? Only 50% of the council to approve new developments?
Thanks for this post. For now I’ll make just one small comment. We hosted house parties when candidates and neighbors showed up in our home. Anybody could ask any question of the candidate and the candidate was in the spotlight to answer. I “went” to one house party for one pair of candidates, hoping to learn more about each, to hear them out, and was pretty shocked to discover that current City Councilor Laredo was the host and question moderator. He chose the questions for the two candidates. (My question was not asked.( Political? Factions?
I found – and find – this arrangement to be very problematic on many levels.
@Matt the idea you’re getting at, around the language of what’s happening, is a bigger issue than just Newton. Yvonne Abraham had a column today about the election in Winchester and Revere touching on this issue. Given where Massachusetts is politically, the idea of being “conservative” or “Republican” just doesn’t play with voters. So people who in the past would have gladly and proudly labeled themselves as such are embracing a different, more liberal label, even as their core beliefs lean more conservative: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/03/metro/out-step/.
Another piece out this week in The New Republic gets at this too, but with a much stronger tone. It focuses on the failure of Massachusetts as a whole to truly embrace progressive ideals and calls out Newton (and our recently-elected congressional representative) in particular. https://newrepublic.com/article/161406/charlie-baker-massachusetts-democratic-party-failure.
Both are worth a read.
John white,
You can see why developers are furiously throwing $$ at candidates to tilt votes to simple majority. We are talking MAJOR profits here…
Link to the new MA law:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/massachusetts-makes-broad-changes-to-zoning-act?amp
When was the last time Newton had a head-to-head at-large election as there is in Ward 1?
Thanks for this post, Bob. For now I’ll make just one small comment that supports your observation. We have hosted house parties when candidates and neighbors have shown up in our home. Anybody could ask any question of the candidate and the candidate was in the spotlight to answer. Last week I “went” to one house party for one pair of candidates with whom I was not so familiar (but had seen their websites), hoping to learn more about each candidate, to hear them out, see if they were espousing what I had heard through others, give them a chance to speak their own minds with their own voice, and was pretty shocked to discover that City Councilor Laredo was the host and question moderator. Councilor Laredo chose the questions for the two candidates. (My question was not asked. Political? Factions?
I found this arrangement to be VERY problematic on many levels.
Bugek:
C’mon now. This trope that developer’s are throwing major money isn’t true. Do developer’s donate to candidates? Sure. But even if they max out, there aren’t enough “developers” who care about big Newton developments to run a campaign on. It is a nice talking point, and folks in prior elections trotted out some donations of a few thousand bucks total to back it up. But with how much money is in the election already it is just a drop in the bucket. Bryan and Maddie had no problem raising funds, and judging by Save Nonantum, John and Tarik are swimming in cash as well.
Plus, I’m pretty sure you know that there is already a supermajority that supports development on the city council. Jake voted for most development, Jay did not from my recollection. I suppose if Tarik and John sweep, there is one less vote for major developments. But with the new majority rule, there would STILL be more than enough votes for major developments. Plus we are still subject to 40B.
It is easy to blame everything on the greedy developers buying our election, but honestly, absent an immediate project in the works, I doubt any group of developers cares who wins these elections. And the few that do aren’t donating enough to matter.
@fig – “Yes for Newton” had one primary if not only contributor …Northland. So yes, money talks.
And while a sweep brings the balance of the Council from 14-8 to 14-10, every seat counts and momentum can carry into the next election which is coming up soon.
… on behalf of Jane Hanser who was having tech problems posting this
Thanks, Bob, for this post highlighting an important observation. For now I’ll make just one small comment. We hosted house parties when candidates and neighbors showed up in our home. Anybody could ask any question of the candidate and the candidate was in the spotlight to answer. Last week I “went” to one house party for one pair of candidates, hoping to learn more about each, to hear them out, to hear them describe their positions in their own voices, and was pretty shocked to discover that City Councilor Laredo was the host and question moderator. He chose the questions for the two candidates. (My question was not asked.( Political? Factions?
I found this arrangement to be VERY problematic on many levels.
Matt: Of course it did in the referendum. You were challenging a large developer with resources, who had already put millions into the project in sunk costs. Don’t be surprised when they defend their investment. And it was a one project referendum…why would anyone BUT Northland pay to defend it? They stood to make millions from it. It was money well spent in their mind. I’m not saying money doesn’t play a role, but you are not comparing apples to apples. Developer money plays a much smaller role in city council elections. Mayor, bigger. But there is SO much money these days in most elections that it dilutes developer impact, and frankly I don’t think most developers give a rats buttocks regarding the outcome of 2 city council races in Newton, one of the most difficult places to develop in MA. Folks trot it out, but it is really just lazy analysis.
As for the sweep, again, that doesn’t change 40B, or the outcome of development in the city, or change the fact that both races are up again in a short time. I doubt development money is playing a role here at all. And I doubt Bryan or Tarik will have any impact on development in the city. The votes aren’t that close. Maybe in a more split council.
@Chuck Tanowitz – Newton’s failure to have a single person of color out of 24 City Councilors / Mayor would be the greatest failure of progressivism here. Heck, even just one elected official is still embarrassing.
Our city should be ashamed. But it seems like so many folks are willing to gloss over the extreme lack of diversity for what?
@Chuck Tanowitz – Newton’s failure to have a single person of color out of 24 City Councilors / Mayor would be the greatest failure of progressivism here. Heck, even just one elected official is still embarrassing.
Our city should be ashamed. But it seems like so many folks are willing to gloss over the extreme lack of diversity. For what? What could be more important in 2021 than being more inclusive in decision-making?
Personal ambition? Greed?
@fig – Developers need to protect their investment, I agree…but what does it say about supporters of “Yes” (who doesn’t put in a dime) vs supporters of “RightSize” who contributes? Money matters. The Rebel Alliance did not win every Star Wars movie.
As for the sweep…one (or two) votes at a time. When’s the next City Council election? This or next November? As Princess Leia said in The Last Jedi, “all it takes is a spark.”
Bob, I empathize with your message and agree that there is much more that brings us together than divides us.
One key schism point that you don’t mention is the topic of schools. What was once a non-controversial matter, and indeed a matter of civic pride, is now a flashpoint. One group of city councilors is strongly committed to getting the kids back in school, and has signed letters to the School Committee to that effect. In choosing my vote in this upcoming election, I have been looking for candidates most likely to push the schools to re-open fully at all levels and return to their prior standards of excellence.
Maybe I’m just a “Radically Moderate Progressive Preservationist” or something like that. I’m tough to pigeonhole and I suspect most other Newton activists are as well. Here’s what I mean.
(1) Things are not as rigid as they appear: I was co-chair of Bernie Sanders 2016 Newton campaign, so I think it’s pretty far fetched to claim I’m not entitled to some bit of the progressive mantle. Most Bernie folks I know are into stuff other than Newton, but those that are tuned in here are probably pretty evenly split. I had many lively spats with many of Hillary’s folks here in 2016 who I’m working hand in glove with for Tarik and John.
(2) It’s Not Just Issues: I’m backing Tarik for policy issues, but even more so because of his personality and temperament. He has gravitas, maturity, life experiences and a capacity to listen and think things through that’s unusual for most people his age.
(3): I enjoy the opportunity to work “across the aisle”.I just signed and contributed to Bob Jampol’s other recent post regarding Bike Newton’s Petition to the Mayor for a wide range of bicycle and pedestrian friendly initiatives. I believe this reflects both progressive and preservationist values, but ones a conservative could also latch onto. I became convinced that these measures, whether implemented partially or in full, will make Newton a better, cleaner and friendlier place to live and work. I have done some constructive brainstorming with Councilors Downes and Bowman, Bob Jampol and Shawn Fitzgibbons in an effort to identify a network of connected minor roads and side streets that older folks who want to bicycle cross city could use to avoid the major roadways. I found them determined and savvy, but realistic.
(4) Find common cause on some issue or project with people on the other side of a political campaign. My efforts for Friends of Hemlock Gorge are a welcome neutral zone where I do things with people I might disagree with on other issues.
To put the city council representation issue in perspective: According to Wikipedia, 2.5% of Newton residents identify as African-American (I assume based on the 2010 census). The probability of the city council not having any one of those people in it is therefore 0.975^24, or 54.4%. Not having an African-American councilor does not indicate systemic bias or widespread failure. The underlying suggestion that Newton voters are racist is utterly ridiculous. “Our city should be ashamed” – what does it even mean? I’m sure most people would like to see more diversity in the city and in the council. That doesn’t mean they vote for candidates based on the color of their skin. I’m so tired of this false debate permeating the discussion of any issue under the sun.
Newtoner- I’m sorry you’re so tired of people thinking that some diversity in our elected representatives might possibly attract more people of color to want to live here. For the record, approximately 20% of Newton residents identify as non-white. But if you’re okay with a whitewashed council you are certainly entitled to feel that way.
Peace.
@Peter- Are you implying that residents should vote for Tarik to add diversity to the city council and ignore whatever policy positions he prefers?
@Peter Kay: How many councilors identify as non-white? I don’t know the answer and not going to try my hand at guessing, but I don’t buy your suggestion that there’s some hidden or overt bias in Newton against non-white candidates. We had a popular black mayor. If you’re serious in your allegations, why don’t you provide data on the race of candidates who ran vs. candidates who won their races?
Peter posts this point on every thread. I think it is a very valid point. I’m only surprised I never heard it when Tarik was running the last time.
Tim, I completely agree with you on schools and the need to go back. But my view is that letter from the city council members was theatre. It accomplished nothing. The city council doesn’t control the school committee or the mayor. I’m sure the angry letter to the manager demanding action makes folks feel like folks are on their side, but it was just ignored by all sides. The entire council could have signed it, and it would have been ignored. The governor and the Commonwealth have had far more impact that any local official, and it is due to that process that elementary schools are back in a few weeks. If someone can point to anything factual regarding what that letter accomplished, I’m happy to retract, but in previous conversations, it really comes down to folks being happy councilors shared their concern. Personally, I never care that the city council agrees with me on anything, or when they express their outrage on national issues. I care about real, actual change.
I’m certainly voting for some new school committee members in the next election though. I’d welcome some advice on that front, since I think we need new blood on the school committee.
Peter posts this point on every thread. I think it is a very valid point. I’m only surprised I never heard it when Tarik was running the last time.
Tim, I completely agree with you on schools and the need to go back. But my view is that letter from the city council members was theatre. It accomplished nothing. The city council doesn’t control the school committee or the mayor. I’m sure the angry letter to the manager demanding action makes folks feel like folks are on their side, but it was just ignored by all sides. The entire council could have signed it, and it would have been ignored. The governor and the Commonwealth have had far more impact that any local official, and it is due to that process that elementary schools are back in a few weeks. If someone can point to anything factual regarding what that letter accomplished, I’m happy to retract, but in previous conversations, it really comes down to folks being happy councilors shared their concern. Personally, I never care that the city council agrees with me on anything, or when they express their outrage on national issues. I care about real, actual change.
I’m certainly voting for some new school committee members in the next election though. I’d welcome some advice on that front, since I think we need new blood on the school committee.
@ Jerry Reilly – I had a similar experience to you about 6 weeks ago. My mail box was full of invitations to zoom presentations by Bryan Barash. My mind was mostly made up, but I decided to see if there was something missing. I like to stay open and I have tried to cross the aisle several times in the past 2 months. So my husband, son, and I get on the zoom call. There are only 11 people on the call – 8 people were running the call and 3 people were guests plus my two family members. We were all put on mute which I found very strange and asked to put our questions in the chat. Bryan talked at us for 50 minutes about ideology. We put 2 questions in the chat that he did not answer. I do not remember the moderator’s name. My husband got up and said “Well, that’s an hour of my life that I will not get back again.” He was not willing to engage with us. Then Bryan reaches out to my husband about another question that he had asked for one of the debates with his cell phone number. Needless to say, we had made our decision and he did not return the call. So it works both ways.
@Newtoner — if you say any given council has a roughly 50:50 chance of being all white, what are the odds of that coin toss coming up white 17 elections in a row? (1-0.544)^17 = 1 in 627,467. Next time it will be 1 in 1.3 million.
Sure — no problem here…
@Ellen,
Many of these calls mute participants to avoid “zoom bombing” with hate speech which does happen. This is common in corporate settings as well as community mtgs.
I struggled for some time on my decision to vote for representation vs candidates whose policy solutions I understand will be more effective at addressing housing discrimination. I consulted with leaders in Newton government, Greater Boston affordable housing orgs, and in several historically Black churches in the Boston area. The consensus was to vote on policy vs representation alone. All the candidates have much to offer. I only share this bc some of the arguments above are over-simplifying what is a complex decision that will be different for each voter.
@Jack Prior: I tried to verify what you’re saying about the last 17 elections, but couldn’t, so I’ll take your word for it. I I’m not denying that there has been bias in the past, I just don’t think that’s the case anymore. Again, if you’re seriously arguing that Newton voters are biased, please provide data on the ratio of running to winning by race/ethnicity. You can’t vote for candidates who don’t exist. But wait! We had a chance vote for a black mayor, and we did… twice… We voted in huge numbers for black school committee members.
Some corrections to your math: The right probability is 0.544^17 = 1 in 31248. Also the percentage of black residents was smaller than 2.5% in the past (1.99% in the 2000 census).
@Bob
Nice post. Your theory takes us halfway there.
I think the distinctions line up better using preferred approach to change versus ideology. Your labels of progressives vs preservationists don’t line up very well for my liking.
In very specific areas of the city, significant change is a given. I also think that the majority of people support most progressive values.
I think residents you label as Progressives see this as an opportunity to advance an idyllic progressive agenda. Their approach is to engineer fast, sweeping change based on current progressive theory.
Residents you label protectionists, mostly share in the support of progressive values and are okay with change, but want to feel a little more in control of that change.
For many, these changes are happening in their backyard and they want to have a voice.
I assume most residents live here because they like living here as it is now.
I’m very satisfied with what we have developed so far on Washington St. However, if one of those projects didn’t happen I would be fine with that as well.
I don’t want Washington Street to resemble. Arsenal St or River St in Watertown, and I don’t believe in a crisis mentality requiring the re-engineering of everything immediately. I can believe these things and still be a progressive.
Finally, there is a category of people that want nothing to change. As far as I can tell that is straight up New England. I’m originally from Gloucester and there are a lot of people there that want absolutely nothing to change because they think the fishing industry is going to come back one day.
So maybe labels should be something like progressive idealists, progressive moderates and objectionists?
“progressive idealists, progressive moderates and objectionists?”
If we must us labels, these much better that what has been thrown around.
And I too am not interested in seeing anything like what is on Arsenal St or River St in Watertown.
Mike Ciolino, you are a voice of reason. Since it doesn’t look like Scott Lennon is going to jump in, and Paul Levy has demured, perhaps you would consider a run for Mayor
@Claire I’m doubtful Mayor is a job I would either enjoy or be good at, but I do appreciate that you find my comments useful. In fact, you probably made my day.
Lots of useful and thoughtful comments so far. I really don’t know if anyone could devise appropriate labels, and I l also wonder if the two groups are solidified factions or merely time-bound coalitions, as has been suggested. But the way support has played out in this election was absolutely predictable, which seems to sustain my overall characterization of the state of affairs. Let’s hope that after the election, councilors of all persuasions will unite for the good of the Garden City when they address matters of importance.
Wow- Now I see the ‘Bryan’ us not to be trusted political ad at the top right hand corner of our very own Village 14 website site.
Whether I am a supporter of Tarik or Bryan, this is an outrage.. or is Village 14 a commercial enterprise with no guidelines for submission? Any attempted explanations?
@Robert Pierson: What Fig said. Village 14 administrators and moderators know as much about the ads that appear as you do.
Robert, you don’t get to pick your ads. Village14 has nothing to do with the ads that run on the page. And it somewhat depends on your ad blocker and cookies I believe. But Village14 is blameless.
Thank you. Well I think it is a safe assumption that the group running the ad has a pretty good idea about what locations it will run in and want their candidate to win even it it takes unscrupulous behavior. Not a great impression for some of us, by a faction of Tarik supporters.
@Mike, you write “Residents you label protectionists, mostly share in the support of progressive values and are okay with change, but want to feel a little more in control of that change.
“For many, these changes are happening in their backyard and they want to have a voice.”
I think this is how you want to see yourself, but I think that overall, Bob is correct in his assessment. My reading of your quote is like this: “On the one hand I’m all for change.. just maybe not in my backyard… unless I approve… and maybe we should move slower, because, well, change is hard and it feels fast to me.”
But that’s really a preservationist viewpoint repackaged as progressive. You say you want change, but when? Do you think you get to decide the pace? If you keep putting it off for tomorrow, when is the right time? If not in your backyard (and in mine) then in whose? If you keep slowing things down and throwing away opportunities for change… what do you think will truly happen?
@ Ellen Whalley.
I had that same experience, but with Tarik and Oliver. My question also was not answered, and the “moderator” was none other than our city councilor, Mark Laredo.
Being that Oliver in particular is a relatively newcomer to the running-for-political-office world, I think he in particular should be more available, answering questions in his own voice, as close as it gets to “real time.” He and Tarik should both be responding, for example, to the issues about that popup ad, and in their own voice.
@Jane
Neither Tarik Lucas nor John Oliver is responsible for “that pop up ad”. It is being run by an independent PAC who are opposed to candidates, and it’s already been pointed out that candidates cannot coordinate with PACs. Nobody controls what the PAC publishes and the PAC is entitled to speak as they wish. That doesn’t mean that we have the right to dictate whether, when and candidates respond to any particular PAC. Sometimes the best response is none at all.
@lisa. Leadership means doing what’s right and speaking up when you see something like this. Especially when it’s someone doing things on your behalf. So far, Maddy has received death threats, Bryan has been attacked personally by these ads, and he’s been attacked for being LGBTQ. This is NOT ok, and the silence speaks volumes about their opponents.
@chuck…for the time being, all 5 candidates are private citizens. None are yet elected officials on the City Council…the leaders of our community. Why are not held accountable to denounce? Does “silence speak volumes” about our elected officials as well?
The reality is that something will always offend somebody. The world is not always right nor fair. Denouncing is not a magic wand to fairness and equity.
As @Lisa said so poignantly, “sometimes the best response is one at all.”
@Chuck,
No it doesn’t “speak volumes” about their opponents, and you have no evidence that the ads by the PAC have anything to do with other attacks on Bryan and Maddie. That’s just drawing such a false connection and particularly regarding Maddie the criticism she received for being perceived as anti-law enforcement was well before this PAC formed.
As for some attack on Bryan or anyone else for how they identify, their race, religion, nationality… I certainly would condemn that but I haven’t even seen any such attack and don’t know anything about it. Is this something someone published as an ad?
@Lisa Parlagreco,
The attack Chuck is referring to was an email that ended up in the Newton Civic Action FB page.The writer apparently thought it was his place to tell Bryan how he is allowed to talk about his LGBTQ identity. It was homophobic and ignorant. I have to imagine that Bryan’s opponents are aware of it by now, and I don’t believe they would be taking any political risks by disavowing it. I’ll even write a statement for them: “I do not support homophobia in any form and I do not support any statements that encourage it.”
@Matt,
Thank you. I do believe that it is often better not to dignify ugly thoughts. We cannot change those hearts and minds so best not to feed them with fuel.
They are asking to be our leaders. They are in this race, it IS about them. John McCain did this during the Presidential race. People were saying things about Obama that would have benefited him but were just damaging and harmful. He called it out… and he didn’t have to do that. So YES, they need to speak up and YES the fact that they are not tells me something.
Joe Kennedy just did this… and he’s a private citizen, but he also has a following and he’s clearly aware of that.
Here is the context on the latest attack: https://twitter.com/jessemermell/status/1368346127909675011?s=21
What’s happened over the past few years is that the culture wars have come to Newton’s city politics. Unfortunately, there’s no turning back.
The past few years have shown that the culture wars have come to Newton’s politics. Unfortunately, there is no turning back.
@ Lisa Parlagreco
You make my point exactly. Why aren’t candidatesTarik Lucas and John Oliver responding and disavowing these ads? Or the fact that a sitting city councilor moderated and chose the questions to ask them in the Zoom house parties?
Why only your voice here in defense? They are the candidates. Where is their voice?
@ Lisa Parlagreco
You make my point exactly. Why aren’t candidatesTarik Lucas and John Oliver responding and disavowing these ads? Or the fact that a sitting city councilor moderated and chose the questions to ask them in the Zoom house parties?
Why only your voice here in defense? They are the candidates. Where is their voice?
Private citizens but running for public office changes everything.
@Chuck
I’m happy to clarify for you – Seeing that you filled my mouth with words and placed me in a box. Next time just ask.
My point is this:
There is a valid progressive position to be had between progressive pro-development and no-development/NIMBY.
Developers have a right to develop their land and residents should have some power in deciding the scope and rate of change in their community.
Compromise isn’t inherently a failure, speed isn’t inherently a virtue, owning a single-family home isn’t inherently racist and silence does not speak volumes.
And just in case you were speaking about me specifically, I’m an abutter to the Northgate Park project in West Newton. I advocated hard for the larger project, against many of my neighbors and lost. What ended up getting built is quite nice and added 5 units of inventory. I have no regrets.
I’ve lived in Newton openly with my partner for the past 17 years, marched on Washington in 1993. When I was president of Newton’s Kiwanis Club in 2006, I advocated that we stop giving funds to the Boy Scouts. Personally, I don’t need any candidate in this race to issue a statement denouncing hateful Twitter comments. Also, Mr. Cicconni shouldn’t have invoked the name of his son – But he did. IMO This is all useless, petty, electioneering.
@Mike that is a totally fair criticism of what I wrote. I was interpreting what I heard, which may be different than what you were trying to say.
A key problem here is that we are dealing with yes/ no issues and not really focused on the nuance, which gets back to what Bob said above.
A big question for me has always been: what role should Newton play in regional housing (and transportation) policy. Many who work in planning, housing and transportation have told me that the policy tends to work better when it is handled at a regional level. This doesn’t happen in Mass at all (home rule) and the opportunity was entirely lost when we gutted our county system. In places like Virginia that’s handled on the county level, which often covers swaths of land that are equal to as many as 38 Massachusetts municipalities.
So when we look at a place like Riverside, or example, which has regional implications in terms of transportation, housing, and economic development, how much of a say should be had by the people who live across the highway in Lower Falls? How much say should Boston’s municipal planning have had in the creation of the Seaport? What about with the development in Fort Point?
@Gail-
Thanks for the info. I have found that particular Facebook group to be a very toxic place, and best avoided. So to be clear, this wasn’t addressed to Bryan, right? Got it. Still ugly but there is a distinction between what one says in public (Chuck’s in apt John McCain example) and what one says in private.
@Jane – I suspect that rather than sifting through nasty Facebook groups or posting here, that the candidates are actually out meeting voters and discussing issues that voters care about, instead of trying to change the minds of their opponents supporters. Final thought: We don’t get to dictate where and when candidates speak. Were I advising a candidate or an elected official, my advice would be to avoid sites that are quite obviously partisan (here and that less than civil, certainly not civic minded Facebook page) … but just my opinion.
Have a nice day.
@Lisa when you say that ” there is a distinction between what one says in public … and what one says in private” what does that mean for Save Nonantum PAC ads, as they were also something said in private that have been made public?
Chuck, don’t you know that they will send you a private message if you ask for it?
I’m teasing but I keep being told when I ask for evidence from folks about unknown acts committed by Bryan or Maddie or of mysterious allegations that they will tell me privately but not publicly. Ellen and others have done it here as well. Smear publicly, then ask for orivacy.
Seems to me that this is part of that. Lots of whisper campaign stuff. Or as Lisa would define it, the stuff folks say in private.
I vote no to all this nonsense.
@Chuck Good point about the macro perspective, it’s definitely something to think about.
So much of this is dependent on transportation I’m surprised there isn’t more discussion by the candidates. Maybe there’s nothing to say?
I lived without a car here in West Newton for 3 years just before Uber came on the scene.
Getting from Nonatham to the Chamber office on Needham Street was near impossible and buses from Downtown Boston to West Newton were highly inconsistent. Often I just walked home from Newton Corner.
@Mike I used to bike to the Chamber offices (and I live up the street from you). I know others would use the 59.
Separately, Kudos to Tarik Lucas who put a statement on his Facebook page condemning the email about Bryan Barash.
Here is the text of the post “I have learned about a recent email regarding my opponent which has now been posted on social media. Let me be very clear: I abhor and condemn any and all bias or discrimination for any reason. Such attacks anywhere in our community, including in a political race, are absolutely unacceptable. I ask everyone to join me in condemning this reprehensible statement.”
@Chuck Good for you on the biking.
I remember biking it once, but West Newton Hill is a deal breaker for me for a business appointment The 59 bus had a limited schedule.
Transportation is useless if it takes you several hours in travel time get to and back from one appointment.
Mike, an e-bike removes that issue with West Newton hill.
Aren’t good e-bikes about a thousand bucks?
MMQC that’s an interesting question, and one that comes up a lot. This is probably a good discussion for another time, but there are a number of initiatives underway to try and offer rebates on e-bikes (similar to what we get now for electric cars). Also, $1000 is nothing compared to the annual cost of car ownership. The podcast The War on Cars has done a couple of episodes on this issue.
Finally, the team behind Park and Pedal has put a number of e-bike rental kiosks around the city. I’ve seen them at Crafts Street and at City Hall.
Sure, if you’re talking about people ditching their car and then buying the e-bike. But is an e-bike going to haul people’s kids to soccer games or help people commute to far and not T accessible locations? No? So that is $1000 on top of the car. I wish that the super “bike bike bike!” people realize that they are coming from a place of privilege when they talk like that. When they assume everyone can get rid of their cars because they themselves have a cushy work from home job or a flexible schedule.
Also, Chuck, how’s the two-car family lifestyle treating you these days?
MMQC: I got a folding Swagtron EB5 for $500. It’s pretty good for many purposes but you quickly realize its limitations. The price point for good quality e-bikes is still too high for too many. You’re looking at about $1500 for a solid e-bike with the range and durability you’d want for years of dependable use.
I’m hoping the federal bill that would provide a 30% tax deduction on the purchase of an ebike (https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/24/22295115/ebike-tax-credit-congress-bill-blumenauer)…
and the MassBike-authored e-bike bill in MA which would give a rebate of up to $500 (or $750 for low income buyers) pass into law,
AND, that Newton, partnering with our local bike shops, establishes our own incentive to purchase e-bikes, leveraging the state and federal incentives.
MMQC, in addition to the valid points you raise, it’s still not safe enough for many to even use a bike or e-bike even if they were made affordable. Only the most risk tolerant and available are able to bike on Newton’s streets presently. Not our kids, not our elders, not those with mobility challenges or just legitimately scared of our streets.
MMQC, in addition to the valid points you raise, it’s still not safe enough for many to even use a bike or e-bike even if they were made affordable. Only the most risk tolerant and able can bike confidently on Newton’s streets presently. Not our kids, not our elders, not those with mobility challenges or just legitimately scared of our streets.
Nathan,
Would love ebike, but without ultra secure bike racks, they are prime target to be stolen.
A simple $200 bicycle is hardly safe from thieves, a $1000 bicycle is not going to last very long before being stolen from the average person
@mmqc, I’m not sure why you bring up the idea that I own two cars. I’ve been consistent in saying that the goal is to reduce car trips. My car sits unused in my driveway for several days at a time. My kids, as they learned how to drive, found it difficult to gain enough driving hours.
But as mentioned above, we are in a vicious cycle. The roads are hostile to anyone who isn’t in a car, and destinations only accommodate cars, then we say “see, people don’t bike!”
Also, 75% of the vehicles sold in this country are SUVs and light trucks. Auto manufacturers have also eliminated any vehicle priced under $25k. I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why spending $30k to $50k on a vehicle is fine, but $1k on a bike makes you elite.
And yes, you can get a bike that will take kids to soccer games, to the T and to work. People do it all the time, they’re called electric cargo bikes. What we need is the infrastructure to support it. Is it for everyone? No. but can it eliminate a ton of car trips, especially those under 3 miles, which make up most of people’s trips? yes! And that has a huge climate impact, which, as it happens, is a priority for the City of Newton.
I will never use my bike to go grocery shopping. I will never use my bike to visit my mom in Gloucester. I will never use my bike If the temperature is under 50° or over 87° I will never use my bike in December January February or March. I will never use my bike in the rain or snow. I will never use my bike to take my two dogs on our daily walk to Stonehurst in Waltham. I’ll never use my bike to meet with my client in downtown crossing. And it will never use my bike after sunset.
Other than these exceptions I’m all in on biking.
@mike. Happy to bike with you to Trader Joe’s or russos. Who knows, maybe you’ll like it！
“…you can get a bike that will take kids to soccer games…” Sure, if you have only one kid and they’re under age 5 or 6. And if they’re playing soccer, not a sport requiring a ton of equipment, like football, baseball, or God forbid hockey.
This is the last I’ll comment on this thread, as this is an absolutely insane argument.
A bike doesn’t have to be just two wheels and nothing else. You can put on bags and baskets, or buy a cargo bike that carries all sorts of stuff. You can have your kid bike right alongside of you. People do it all over the world, including in places that have winter… bad winters… with ice and snow and sleet. Kind of like here.
You have to have a couple of things to make this possible:
1) Infrastructure — It needs to be safe, comfortable and clear. It’s not hard, cities around the world do it. The municipality just needs to commit to it; and
2) People who truly believe that climate change is a problem that needs addressing. Reducing car trips is one of the best things you can do for the environment. Better than buying an electric car. If people are committed to solving the problem, then they can look for solutions.
Or we can just throw up our hands and say “well… here are all the reasons you can’t do it.”
There is a reason why cars were invented. To traverse thru and offer protection from inclimate weather. To carry more stuff than we can carry with two arms. As the Chinese developed an economy, what did they do? Become one of the largest car markets in the world…and in the process, pushing the industry into electrification.
Biking is great recreational activity, but no amount of bike lanes are going to change the fact that people need to get around, often with more than one person, and lots is stuff, thru all kinds of weather. Even the Amish have horse and buggies.
Tarik has spoken out. I have not heard any of the other candidates speak out against the hateful racist messages he has received.
@Chuck – I agree that with the right infrastructure in place, many car trips could be – and should be – replaced by biking and walking. But again – no matter how committed you are to solving the problems of climate change, if you have to get 2 kids to two different games that start 30 minutes apart at fields 5 miles away from each other, and a 3rd kid who has to get picked up from dance after that, you can’t do it on a bike. And if you’re working multiple jobs to make ends meet, you might not have the extra time available that biking to and from activities with your kids requires. And as someone who spent $7k on my last (used) car, yeah, a $1k e-bike sounds pretty elite to me. That’s the “privilege” aspect that MMQC is getting at.
Climate change is not the biggest problem facing the world. The internet is as exemplified so V14. Hopefully someday soon, someone will find a way of turning this thing off so we can all go back to having a reasonable society. Until then, it’ll be all about cat pictures, useless memes, and replacing cars with bikes.
@Chuck actually might be a good diet strategy as I would certainly buy fewer groceries if I had to carry them! If Trader Joe’s would install a small dog park I would walk there regularly.
Exactly, Matt. A bike can’t replace my driving needs at the time and I certainly can’t afford a e-bike, nor do I have a place to store one in my small old home. The people who are like “bike everywhere!” are out of touch with people in lower income brackets and lifestyles.
Biking is not a yes or no solution. I love biking, but will not bike when there is ice on the ground, or it’s raining, sleeting, snowing, etc. But, if we care about reducing pollution – and not just greenhouse gases, cars including EV cars cause the lion’s share of particulate matter pollution, which increases COVID deaths, heart problems, asthma, etc.
Reducing car use, by walking and biking when possible, will help reduce pollution. This requires, not only safe sidewalks and bikeways, but also that shops, parks, etc. be close enough to walk to.
Since we’ve lived in Newton, Newton Center has lost many useful stores (John Dewer, the hardware-like store, etc.) that we could easily walk to. I hope the ones remaining, like Newtonville Books, survive COVID.
This has somehow morphed into a biking conversation….
As for biking, Lucia raises a good point- none of this is a zero sum game. Making streets friendlier to cyclists and pedestrians does not outlaw cars, but to Chuck’s point it does encourage more of those activities.
The message is/should be “walk or bike where and when you can and we’ll make it easier” and not “you must bike everywhere.” That was never the message.
I will also add that Chuck’s insistence that everyone bike
is inherently ableist. I have a child that will likely never be able to ride a bicycle and nobody should ever shame him for that. You wouldn’t be able to tell by looking at him, but he has a visual-spatial disability and after nearly a decade of working on biking, including with medical professionals, it just isn’t happening. So I think Chuck et al need to be mindful of their arguments being egregiously ableist and understand that there are plenty of people who don’t bike but not because they hate the planet but for serious and perhaps private reasons ranging from physical to perhaps psychological. So stop it with the “sure, everyone can bike and should do so now!” For someone who seems to pride himself on being “progressive” it doesn’t appear that inclusivity is something you have on your kind.
Mind**
Please oh please stop it with the “ableist” label. Unfair. Foolish and provocative. @Chuck encourages Newton citizens to use bikes to reduce the number of car trips. Nowhere does he insist that everyone bike. We know some people can’t and won’t. Understood. BTW- Visit Copenhagen or Amsterdam to see how bikes are fully integrated into the social fabric. Their citizens would find this thread bizarre. A passionate nudge in that direction is good for us.
Can one of the admins start a new thread about biking in Newton? City council stuff getting stale. Biking topic timely with the change in weather, and will probably get some lively comments. First question to Peter: anything specific they do in Europe for bike traffic that’s feasible for Newton to do in the near term?
@Peter, thank you. @Adam, I’ll try to start a thread soon. And @MMQC I’m sorry you think I’m abelist. I want as many people to bike as possible so there is room for those who need the driving lanes and parking spaces, like my father-in-law, who is unable to walk more than a few feet at a time. Or the people I see in electric wheelchairs who are often trying to cross very wide streets rather than having protected infrastructure to use for their own mobility. I saw one coming down Grove Street near the MBTA, facing traffic, in the driving lane, because how else was he supposed to get to the T?
Or the woman with a walker I saw a few weeks ago when I was walking along Crafts Street. The sidewalk wasn’t wide enough for both of us so I moved off into the snow. Or the kid who nearly hit me when he was biking on the Watertown Street sidewalk near the fire station in Nonantum. He was there because he clearly didn’t feel safe on the street. We haven’t given him any other place to be.
What happens when, on that 3ft wide sidewalk, the kid on the bike meets the woman with the walker?
I signed and contributed to Bike Newton’s recent petition to Mayor Fuller to expand bicycling options in Newton. I did so because I became convinced that most of the objectives are not only desirable but achievable at least in part. They will make Newton a better place to live and work in. I also became irked that Bike Newton was getting blamed in some quarters for the many cyclists who don’t wear helmets, run red lights and otherwise refuse to follow the rules of the road, It’s pretty clear that the clowns that do so aren’t Bike Newton folks. I have stated differences on development issues with several City Councilors who are Bike Newton’s most passionate advocates, but I had some wonderfully productive working sessions with them a few years back trying to designate back roads in Newton that older people like me could use to bike across the city. I’m also on the Board of Directors of Friends of Hemlock Gorge and again appreciate the support and guidance from people on the other side of our development issues.
Bob Jampol is the veritable Switzerland of Newton political and civic life because he’s taught us that it’s not a sin to reach across the aisle and work with people on a pressing issue even if you aren’t with them on other important matters. I’m going full throttle but positive for Tarik Lucas and John Oliver, but don’t intend to demonize anyone or burn any bridges in the process. I never have and hopefully never will. I just may want to work with them on something down the road.
@Bob Burke –
… and that’s one of the many reasons there’s such a big Bob Burke fan club in Newton.
@Village14 administrators – can we please remove the name of the elderly man whose email has become the subject of a lot of talk, but no compassion for him. Do we REALLY NEED TO DOX a senior citizen who expressed his views not to any candidate but in a private email? Do we really need to further inflame people? Please get a grip people. I hope if I’m still around when I reach my 80’s that people will have a little more compassion for me if I say something really regrettable like that. I hope I wouldn’t, but we are all human. Can we just try a little more kindness please instead of weaponzing the email of an elderly man.
@Lisa Parlagreco – Yes
** A comment was just removed because it referenced the identity of the author of a widely circulated private email. The commenter is welcome to re-post the same comment so long as they remove the man’s identity …. but personally, I’d rather they didn’t 😉
@Jerry,
Thank you very much for attending to that so quickly. Wish I knew how to post one an emoticon here but assume that a double thumbs up follows. 🙂
@Jerry how about this?
There was a homophobic email associated with a senior member of RightSizeNewton. It was, shall we say, this senior citizen’s “Blue Print” or “Bill” of lading for how he lives in the world and views others who are different from him – meaning some of us were not surprised by what he wrote in the email.
Question – he is an outspoken member of RightSizeNewton, does RightSizeNewton endorse this view? AFAIK, they have not made a comment on this.
@BobBurke You are full throttle for both Tarik Lucas and John Oliver. How do you feel about this email as you have worked with this person. My concern is that this senior citizen campaigned and endorsed both of your candidates? Are the candidates not judged by the company that they keep?
Furthermore, comments like this, from this senior citizen, who shall stay nameless, are what divides Newton and contributes to hate against all groups; examples include People of Color, the Asian Community, and the LGBTQ community. Is any group immune to the nastiness? Or do we stay silent when it benefits our candidate?
@lisa if this email were someone from Bryan’s or Maddy’s team would you still have the same opinion on anonymity?