Tonight at 7:00 PM, the Zoning and Planning Committee of the Newton City Council (ZAP) will hold a public hearing on a request to amend the city’s zoning code to restrict firearm sales. Meeting agenda and Zoom link. (The ZAP meeting begins at 6:30, but the gun-store public hearing won’t begin until 7:00.)
The Planning Department has published a Public Hearing Memorandum that describes the objective of the request to regulate gun stores, outlines the levers available, and makes a specific recommendation. Well worth the time to read, especially if you’re planning on testifying.
Cutting to the chase, the Planning Department recommends:
Planning staff recommend allowing firearm businesses in the Business 2 (BU2), Business 4 (BU4) and Manufacturing (M) districts and requiring 150-foot buffers between all firearm businesses and properties containing a residential use, and a 1,000-foot buffers between all firearm businesses and k-12 schools, childcare facilities (including daycares and preschools), colleges and universities, parks and playgrounds, libraries, nursing homes and any existing firearm dealers or firing ranges.
The locations that meet these criteria are in two places in the city: a bit of Route 9 in Chestnut Hill and a bit of the Rumsford Ave./Riverside Ave. neighborhood near the Waltham line.
Click on the image to expand. Note: helpful arrows added by Village 14 to the city image.
Here’s the Chestnut Hill area in greater detail.
Click on the image to expand. It’s basically The Street property
Here’s the Rumsford/Riverside area in greater detail:
Click on the image to expand.
Here are the levers available to the city to use zoning to regulate where gun stores can be located:
- Current zoning districts
- Buffer zones to residences, K-12 schools (public and private), and what are referred to as “other sensitive uses,” like childcare, playgrounds, other firearms dealers
The Planning Department’s objective was to create some — but very few — areas where gun sales are permitted. The Planning Department did not consider overlay zoning as that would be outside of the scope of the docketed item and, therefore, would require a new public hearing. (Keep in mind that the city is trying to get zoning changes in place quickly enough to prevent a proposed gun store from opening on Washington St. The clock is ticking.)
The Planning Department considered five alternatives, including the recommended approach. Links are to maps that show the areas available to gun stores under each alternative, similar to the map image above, but in higher fidelity.
| Allowed districts | Buffer to residential | Buffer to K-12 | Buffer to other uses | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alternative 1 — map | BU2, BU4, M, LM, MU1 | 150 ft. | 1,000 ft. | 500 ft. |
| Alternative 2 — map | BU4, M, LM, MU1 | 150 ft. | 1,000 ft. | 500 ft. |
| Alternative 3 — map | BU2, BU4, M, LM, MU1 | 150 ft. | 1,000 ft. | 500 ft. (adds marijuana retailers and liquor license holders) |
| Alternative 4 — map | BU2, BU4, M, LM, MU1 | 250 ft. | 1,000 ft. | 500 ft. |
| Alternative 5 — map — recommended | BU2, BU4, M, LM, MU1 | 150 ft. | 1,000 ft. | 1,000 ft. |
BU2, BU4 — Business Use 2, Business Use 4
M, LM — Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing
MU1 — Mixed Use 1
Sensitive Uses — daycare center, preschool, childcare facility, college or university, public park intended for passive or active recreation, playground, land or structures used for religious purposes, library or nursing home (except Alternative 3, which includes marijuana retailers and liquor license holders)
The Planning Department recommends Alternative 5 because it provides the greatest buffering, while still allowing meaningful opportunities. Alternative 1 provides more alternatives than are necessary. Alternatives 2’s buffer to other sensitive uses is smaller than Alternative 5’s. Adding marijuana and liquor to Alternative 3 results in too few meaningful opportunities. And, Alternative 4’s larger residential buffer requires a smaller buffer to other sensitive uses, otherwise it doesn’t create meaningful opportunities.
Regardless of the districts in which gun stores will be allowed and the buffers to residential, K-12 schools, and other sensitive uses, the proposed zoning amendment will require a special permit to open a gun store. The Planning Department’s proposed special permit criteria, in addition to the standard special permit criteria are:
• The lot is designed such that it provides convenient, safe and secure access and egress for clients and employees arriving to and leaving from the lot;
• The location will have adequate and safe storage, security, and a lighting system;
• Loading, refuse, and service areas are designed to be secure and shielded from abutting uses;
• The establishment is designed to minimize any adverse impacts on abutters; and
• The establishment has satisfied all of the conditions and requirements of this section.Firing ranges will also need to meet this additional criterion:
• The use will not result in adverse impacts due to noise, hazardous materials, or air quality.
What do you think? Which alternative looks best to you? Is there a better plan?
A note on the current state from the Planning Memorandum:
Currently in Newton, a firearm dealer would be classified under zoning as a retail use. Retail uses are currently permitted, either by-right or by special permit in the Business 1 (BU1), Business 2 (BU2), Business 3 (BU3), Business 4 (BU4), Mixed Use 1 (MU1), Mixed Use 2 (MU2), Mixed Use 4 (MU4), Mixed Use 3 (MU3), and Limited Manufacturing (LM) zoning districts.
The biggest problem with more guns in people’s houses means more death by suicide.
Accidental deaths and injuries, spousal homicide, and guns stolen during household break ins are other problems.
As a retired family doctor, I know of many of my generation who secretly played with their parents’ guns without their knowledge despite being severely warned never to do so.
Go to Shake Shack for a bite then you can go to The Gun Shack and grab your Glock and catch a flick at Superlux!
I say we zone it only to The Street instead of continuing to dump the unwanted near the Rumford Depot. This has the added benefit of being the closest possible location to Mayor Magoo’s house (aka Magoo Manor) which is only fair considering how asleep she has been at the wheel on this.
To clarify: does “meaningful opportunities” mean eligible spaces for gun shops? Is Newton legally/constitutionally obligated to provide these opportunities? What if, for instance, the buffer zones were larger, thus resulting in no opportunities (because Newton does have a great many schools, parks, etc.)? Thanks.
Holly,
Though it’s not addressed explicitly in the Planning Department’s memorandum, it seems to be the city’s position that an outright ban on gun stores — directly or through zoning/buffers — would run afoul of the 2d Amendment. (This may have been addressed in the memorandum prepared for the last meeting.) The memorandum for this meeting does say:
I. would like to know: What are the consequences of not allowing any gun store in Newton?
Remember Congressman John Lewis saying, “WE NEED TO MAKE GOOD TROUBLE.”
WARREN BURGER, SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE:
May be an image of 1 person, smiling and text that says ‘The Gun Lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies the militia- would be maintained for the defense of the state The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires. -Warren Burger, Supreme Court Chief Justice’
With all duo respect to the chief justice , but that is not what the second amendment states he needs to go back to law school and study constitutional law. As for the city as any reasonable person can see the city is setting them self up for a discrimination law suit of which they will loose. As well as possible harassment charges.
@Sarah Lamstein,
That’s an excellent quote from Chief Justice Burger, but it does not reflect the Supreme Court’s view of the Second Amendment since 2007. That year, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court held that the language relating to militias was prefatory announcing a purpose, but that it was not limiting and, moreover, that the Second Amendment does protect an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in state armies or militia, and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes such as defense of the home.
The decision may be viewed and read here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
Yes but the Supreme Court has been known to issue poor decisions, for example, have you heard of Dred Scott? The Supreme Court is not guided by divine inspiration. As a result, they can issue misguided rulings.
@Lisa Parlagreco, that only proves that the Supreme Court, too, is a fraud.
And I’m not feeling much better about the proposal, which moves the potential location of a gun store from about 3 miles from my house to less than 2. Forgive me for not being excited. Unless someone thought we really ran the risk of becoming overrun with gun stores, I have a hard time believing the location really matters anyway, as if driving distance or city boundaries are going to have any impact on gun ownership. Or were people going to walk to the gun store?
Serious question: What are you all afraid of? Its an incredibly highly regulated lawful retail business. The store would make guns no more meaningfully accessible by Newton residents other than those who are likely to be restricted in their ability to commute, IE the “poor” if such a thing exists in Newton, and the disabled and elderly.
Also, the type of business aside, do none of you see an issue with pulling the zoning out from under the rug of a business that has already made a substantial investment in getting established. Something that traditionally is unlawful? Also, funny how you have all ignored that law enforcement states that this is a good location for the shop, but that contradicts the virtue signaling of “no guns near schools.”
Finally, a couple points to @Sarah Lamstein, you do realize that the entire gun-control architecture in this country is setup to disenfranchise minorities and keep “undesirables,” aka people of color, from being able to access firearms, right? Massachusetts provides total discretion to police chiefs to issue licenses. Who do you think that impacts? Not wealthy white people. Also, Heller affirms what was obvious to an anyone who objectively looks at the history of 2A. It’s an individual right. Fortunately, I expect the SCOTUS to expand it to lawful carrying of firearms as well.
Note that the Street is literally across the street from a daycare facility (Panda Cub Academy), under 1,000 feet from the entire site. It’s in Brookline, of course, as the city border is along route 9 at that point, but I would have to imagine that either the facility or some of its inevitably (given the location) Newton-based parents would challenge that the Street site is acceptable under the recommended scenario.
As much as I would like to see a massive change to the Constitution, and as much as I believe that the current interpretation of the Second Amendment is entirely wrong (and not at all in line with other ideals proclaimed by so-called “originalists”) the issue locally is whether Newton is the type of city that is willing to take a legal stand and push the envelope. I would love for that to be so and for Newton to say: we’re going to make a ruling and take on any challenge that comes our way.
My experience here, however, is entirely the opposite. We tend to follow trends, not lead them. Change happens slowly, which is why it feels so jarring when it does. Given all that, what’s being proposed is likely the most realistic “win” that can be expected.
A win for screwing over a small business that has already invested in opening and generating revenue in the city.
Again, none of you can say why other than it’s just another form of virtue signaling. I love that you people are so willing to burn through residents tax money to make your partisan political points.
Is there a second amendment right to *sell* guns?
Are we all out of our minds. The NRA is trying to rule and destroy the world for their own selfish benefit. They already control the republican party, and are pushing for usa control. It is all about money, and our political system is becoming slaves to these gready bastards. What do you think? We need more crazy people owning guns? This country is reverting back to the ways of the old west. Ban guns in Newton. I mean make it a felony to carry a loaded gun, and to have one anywhere other than firing ranges, and legal hunting grounds. When you go to one of these places, the gun must be boxed, and not assembled. No firing pins, or amo in the box. Newtonits can always go elsewhere to get their weapons, but we have to start anti gun laws where we can. Newton is the first step. No gun stores in Newton!!!!!!!!!
Happy to discuss this with anyone, but you better not be a crazy person.
There is nothing wrong with having a gun store in the area where it was about to open. Massachusetts gun regulations are strict enough that no random person without a license , especially a criminal would be able to buy a gun. The pot shop next door has much more negative effect on the neighborhood and on the kids, promoting an idea that drugs are good . Gun shop does not promote violence. The gun shop is a valid business. Hope it opens and survives.
@Mike
Most people in Newton just don’t share your values, bottom-line. I don’t want a gun store in Newton. I’d ban guns if we could- reverse second amendment outright. Many here would. I understand you don’t agree. You chose to live in one of the most liberal places of the country. That’s your choice. You aren’t going to convince people to change their minds on guns. If you don’t like it, live somewhere else if it’s that important to you. That’s the honest truth.
Thanks for the update, @sean.
Back in the day, cities and towns were able to prevent adult theaters from opening through zoning regulations, and those must have withstood some first amendment challenges.
Effectively preventing gun stores from opening in one particular town does not infringe on 2A rights. I too would like to see Newton take a lead on this, but I doubt it will.
I do not want to see gun stores and ownership normalized in my city. MA has the lowest rate of gun fatalities in the country ( https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/21/states-most-and-least-gun-violence-see-where-your-state-stacks-up/359395002/) and there are many reasons for that, but the rarity of gun shops is one.
A gun shop isn’t merely a business. Mayor Fuller seems to have massively dropped the ball, and/or not been forthcoming about what she knew when about this store opening.
The ‘Alex’ who posted the above comment at 1:00PM today is not me.
I will note, though, that Roaches in Kendall Square closed in 2012, after 108 years in business.
As for pot shops, as far as i know, that stuff is still not federally legal. But i don’t know how the National law applies at the state level.
Correction: Roaches was in Porter Square. Also, Service Merchandise, which was in the East Cambridge Twin City Plaza for many years, also sold firearms and ammunition, if memory serves.
@Alec Wilson
Using your logic couldn’t one say “You chose to live in America one of the most pro-gun countries in the world. That’s your choice. You aren’t going to change people’s minds on guns. If you don’t like it, live somewhere else if that’s important to you. That’s the honest truth.”?
Thank you residents of Newton for standing your ground and upholding your moral sensibilities on this issue. I really hope you succeed in your endeavors in keeping a lawfully run business out of your community.
As a gun owner and second amendment advocate, we could really use your help right now.
In 2007 when the DC v Heller decision was reached and ruled that the second amendment applied to non-militia service, it was considered a groundbreaking victory in advancing our Constitutional rights.
However, since then the court has been very reluctant to take up the issue again. Fortunately some of you people may very well be handing us the golden opportunity we need.
It’s guaranteed that any attempts at violating that amendment will be met with fierce opposition and legal action. Perhaps it will be upheld in the lower courts, perhaps not.
Currently we’re fortunate and blessed to have one of the most conservative and second amendment friendly Supreme Courts in decades. Should any legal action proceed and make it that far, I’m more than confidante that gun owners would win a favorable decision. Not only would that be a victory for MA firearms owners, but for firearms owners nationwide.
Except according to recent surveys, 2/3 of the American population support stronger gun laws. After 20+ years of mass shootings all over this country, guns just aren’t that popular anymore.
This is absurd and absolutely moronic. Let them make a living and stop being scared of hunks of metal, polymer and wood.
Lisa, if guns are not popular any more why are sales skyrocketing? People want to protect themselves and loved ones. As to Russell Lichtman’s comments about guns being boxed and not having firing pins in them , totally wrong all around. I think a lot of people need to be educated about obtaining proper licensing & the many steps needed to do this.
Stronger gun laws is such a nebulous concept. As someone who believes that the Heller decision didn’t go nearly far enough, I do think there are areas where gun-laws could be, at the very least, modified to be more effective — “strengthened” so to speak. Fortunately, I have cautiously high hopes that the Supreme Court will be able to expand Heller in the coming years. One important broadening would be affirming what should be obvious: You have the right to carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense. We’ll see, though.
It is so neighborly of some of you to say, “if you don’t agree with things, leave, we don’t want you.” That, actually, is one of the main reasons I moved to a surrounding town when I moved back to the Boston area. Also, I wanted my children to grow up with more diversity than exists in Newton, which is basically none. Unless Newton has somehow become more diverse in the past decade, which I highly doubt as $1M homes are razed for $3M new constructions.
As to Russel’s comment, the constant panic over a gun-shop in Newton is ridiculous when thousands of residents have a license to carry, and I know many people, including myself, who lawfully carry a firearm in Newton. Also, I agree the NRA needs to be reformed. It’s an incredibly important organization of which I am proud to be a member, but it has been quite mismanaged due to the selfishness and greed of those who run it. I do love all the hate that one of the most democratic lobbying organizations gets, though.
“(If you’re one of us, then leave.)”. Pretty much sums up Newton politics today.
Newton was not always, “one of the most liberal places in the country”. As Boston’s academic and industry grew, so too did the cost of housing and in the process, squeezing out the middle class…and with it, moderate Democrats.
It’s all pretty depressing.
Thank you residents of Newton for standing your ground and upholding your moral sensibilities on this issue. I really hope you succeed in your endeavors in keeping a lawfully run business out of our community. As a gun owner and second amendment advocate, we could really use your help right now.
In 2007 when the DC v Heller decision was reached and ruled that the second amendment applied to those in a non-militia service, it was considered a groundbreaking victory in advancing our Constitutional rights. However, since then the court has been very reluctant to take up the issue again. Fortunately some of you people may very well be handing us the golden opportunity we need.
It’s guaranteed that any attempts at violating that amendment will be met with fierce opposition and legal action. Perhaps it will be upheld in the lower courts, perhaps not.
Currently we’re fortunate and blessed to have one of the most conservative and second amendment friendly Supreme Courts in decades.
Should any legal action proceed and make it that far, I’m more than confidante that gun owners would win a favorable decision. Not only would that be a victory for MA firearms owners, but for firearms owners nationwide.
Has anyone here advocating the barring a firearm store in Newton looked into the process of obtaining a LTC and a Firearm within Massachusetts?
Buying a firearm in Massachusetts differs greatly from other States, like New Hampshire, where as long as you are a law abiding citizen and full time resident of the state, you can purchase a firearm without specialized licensing. This is not the case with Massachusetts.
You can’t just walk into a store and purchase a firearm. It doesn’t happen. Period. You first, sit for a basic firearm safety course offered at various locations within the state. After successful completion, you can then apply for a LTC through your local police department. The wait can take anywhere from 2-6 months. The department will either issue you a restricted or unrestricted LTC. The process is the same for a FID(for those under 21) but limits what you can legally purchase.
After all these steps, you can purchase a firearm.
@Lisa
I am all for common sense gun laws. Massachusetts has the best regulations in the country. That being said more regulation does not equal less popularity. According to the FBI every year since 2016 has broken a new record in gun sales.
So seeing that 2/3rds of Americans want better regulation doesn’t seem to correlate with the amount of people purchasing them. Even gun sales in women are up 40%. You can still want regulation and own guns its called wait for it responsible gun ownership….
So yes looking at data guns have never been more popular here in the states. So maybe take some of Alec’s amazing advice “if you don’t like it then leave”.
Newton Massachusetts we welcome diversity, as long as you agree with us and if you don’t you can get out
FREEDUMB
“Ban guns in Newton. I mean make it a felony to carry a loaded gun, and to have one anywhere other than firing ranges, and legal hunting grounds.”
I’m pretty sure that this actually already exists in MA. As a matter of fact, I know that it exists given that MA is a “may issue” state and in many cases slaps restrictions (target\hunting) when issuing LTC’s. However, I think that it’s likely that the Supreme Court will change that and expand it in their upcoming case (yay for that). What I find most odd about all of this discussion is that none of it has really focused on the issue at hand, which in my opinion is the City of Newton changing the rules in the middle of the game. For such a self proclaimed “tolerant” group of residents, I don’t get the feeling that anyone is willing to at least have an open mind or any meaningful dialogue about allowing a store, instead they would rather insert their moral beliefs and opinions about firearms as a whole.
At the end of the day, you’re seeking to strip an individual of their right to prosper, simply because you don’t agree with a product that they are selling. They’re just an individual trying to make a living and feed their family. Is a non-conspicuous store front, in a heavily regulated business, really worth stripping someone of this right?
@Mike @Cyrus
Read more carefully guys. I don’t care if you live here or not. I made the point that people in Newton overwhelmingly don’t agree with your viewpoint, it’s a fundamental difference in values. I suggested to leave- if it’s important to you. Read my words. Mike has been posting constantly on this topic, so it seems like it’s a big issue for him. I know I wouldn’t want to live in a place where people had such different values on an issue that mattered a lot to me. We all benefit from a diversity of ideas and thinking, but some fundamental values are important. I choose life. Most others in Newton choose life. You choose freedom for guns- that’s a basic fundamental difference. There are other places in the country where people share those values. I don’t want to live there, just surprising you want to live here.
PS We learn that Mike doesn’t even live in Newton now??? Why is he on V14? Just to troll us?
Anthony and Mike (and others):
I certainly understand that any restriction on gun shops will potentially impact the gun shop owner. I would have more sympathy if that particular gun shop owner had followed the rules on building permits, and actually gotten one. Because if he can’t follow the rules on something as simple as a building permit, why do we think he will follow the rules on who will get a gun and the various licensing rules?
And Anthony, we regulate folks on all sort of rights, and there is no inherent right to “prosper” in a vacuum. Otherwise we could walk into a gun store and buy a rocket launcher or grenade launcher. Will no one think of the makers and sellers of rocket launchers? What about their rights to prosper? Oh the humanity!
@ Alec Wilson
Everyone chooses life (regardless of you views on the 2ND) and is honestly a very weak argument when it comes to the second amendment. The department of Justice in 2016 found that 90% of gun related crimes were committed with illegally acquired firearms. So banning them won’t really halt crime. Don’t believe me lets look back on the 18th amendment and the war on drugs. Both have proven that banning something only increases demand and crime.
No one wants to be in a situation where they would need to use a gun absolutely no one but who are you to say how I or someone else defends their family?
Half of the people in Newton are calling to Defund the Police. We then saw a rise in break ins and even a home invasion. So yes I would like a means to defend myself and my family, which I repeat I hope I never have to.
The fundamental difference between us is I understand there are differences of opinion. I don’t smoke or drink and believe they are the cause of problems way larger than gun violence, but I am not calling for a ban of alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana for they wont work.
I personally believe our tax dollars will be better spent funding public health programs to help with mental health issues and addiction, which are far larger plagues on our society than most care to admit.
Here are numbers for you 3 and 100,000 people die of firearms in Massachusetts (taking into the 90% that is 1 in 100,000 through legal firearms) now opioids are 14.6 per 100,000 (4.6 per 100,00 in legal prescriptions). I don’t see us discussing CVS or Walgreens or questioning some of the big pharma executives that live in Newton.
So in short to say I choose firearms over life is just flat out weak and uneducated. Its the same as me saying that if you ever buy a prescription or drink alcohol you don’t support life….grow up
The fact of the matter is what we disagree on backs that what I believe in is legal and what you believe in violates a person rights…..
Sources
https://www.drugabuse.gov/drug-topics/opioids/opioid-summaries-by-state/massachusetts-opioid-involved-deaths-related-harms
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/suficspi16.pdf
“why do we think he will follow the rules on who will get a gun and the various licensing rules?”
Because violating these rules is a felony and will get him thrown in jail immediately after the ATF or mass state police raids the place and he’ll lose his FFL and state license. Building permit bureaucracy is not even remotely the same thing.
I guarantee virtually everyone opposed to this shop knows nothing about the process of legally owning a firearm in this state.
fignewtonville
While I understand that he didn’t follow the rules, I would be interested in hearing about other businesses that have attempted in the past to open and didn’t pull a permit or forgot or for whatever reason didn’t have a permit. Were those businesses also zoned out of Newton or were they given the opportunity to meet the requirements (get a permit) and then continue doing the work they needed to do to open their business? One could argue that by that logic, any business that doesn’t follow the process to a “T” should be shunned from the city. Should we assume that because a bar owner forgets to get a permit or misunderstands the process (whatever the reason) that they’re going to start serving 6 year old’s?
It’s pretty evident that this business is being treated differently than every other business. Regardless of whether or not people like it, it doesn’t make it okay to do.
“I know I wouldn’t want to live in a place where people had such different values on an issue that mattered a lot to me”
People who think like you, on the left, and on the right, are what are tearing this country apart right now. Your thinking is a problem.
As a hopeful customer of this shop, this does matter to me. I also spent 20 or so years in Newton and find myself in Newton on a weekly basis. I don’t own a home in Newton at present. Not because I don’t agree with the politics of Newton, but because there are too many people in Newton like you: who can’t stand having to associate with people who don’t believe exactly as you do. The arrogance is tiresome.
Anthony:
There are multiple stop work orders on doors around Newton. Go walk around Newtonville, there is one in the doorway in the Masonic Center commercial space. My point is simple, if they can’t follow the simple rules, why would we trust them to follow the more difficult and important ones?
Mike, funny, I’ve generally found Newton to be a welcoming place. I grew up in the South, in a conservative rural area with lots of gun ownership. Let me know if you want to compare the level of intolerance and group think. Newton is pretty good overall, and no place is perfect. Just sayin.
I get that there are “multiple stop work orders on doors around Newton.” My question is, are there special hearings every time a business is issued a stop work order and are those businesses then zoned out of Newton after the hearing? Or are those businesses allowed to get in compliance and then continue to their work to get ready to open?
If the sincere answer is that there are special hearings and then they are zoned out, then I’m fine with this action. If the answer is something else, that would indicate to me that they are clearly being treated differently than every other business. I’m not sure how anyone could deny that.
Fignewtonville, I’m living in rural Alabama at this very moment. At least to your face, people are much nicer here (than the northeast, generally)
Anthony:
They aren’t zoned out, but the stop-work often causes the endevour to end. The zoning is unique in this case. The lack of permit compliance doesn’t make for confidence in this particular business owner. If you are going to break new ground, best take care of the basics.
Mike, I’ve spent a fair amount of time in Alabama. Folks are very nice there, if you belong to their group and agree with them on major issues. Speaking from hard experience, if you don’t share the same religion/ethnicity, you get treated differently in Alabama by many folks. Sometimes quietly. Sometimes not so quietly. There are good folks everywhere, so I’m not eager to paint with a broad brush, but I can certainly bare witness to some awful experiences in Bama. Some great folks too, but an awful lot of discrimination and fear.
With that said, I think a lot of folks of different colors and creeds would say that about Boston too. I do think Boston has gotten better over the years. My last visit home, kinda felt like folks in rural Florida were doubling down on some bad beliefs. A lot of anger. Not much conversation to be had, most folks had made up their minds. Maybe that is just where we are these days.
The business followed all of the rules (as far as we know) with the exception of the building permit. Saying that it’s a “unique case” is just a way to justify zoning the business out of their original plans. There’s nothing unique about this case other than the fact that people don’t want the business there. If this were any other business, they’d be issued a stop work order and then they would either get the appropriate permit and continue work or they wouldn’t and they wouldn’t be allowed to continue work and eventually open.
I’d be hard pressed to believe that any other business that was issued a stop work order had to then find a new location for their business because the town happened to re-zone their type of business out of the currently planned location. I’m not asking anyone to change their views on whether they want it or not, but at least admit that this business is without a doubt being treated completely different than any other business before it. This sets a precedence for all business that come after it that someone may not like, as well.
The town has said as much. Basically, screw this guy, screw his business, and we want to do whatever means necessary to make his life miserable/make it impossible for him to open his business. We’ll base all of this off extreme political partisanship, fear of guns due to our own ignorance, and nimbysism*
*Ignoring the fact that thousands of Newton residents are licensed to carry firearms.
Of course the discriminatory Planning Dept recommends Alternative 5 (West Newton, Rumford Ave, closer to Waltham line which already has one gun shop). It’s one of the least affluent sections of the city with more minorities. The Planning Dept loves to put the 40Bs /more density here too (gets the least resistance).
These folks don’t pad Mayor Fuller’s campaign coffers and are too busy working two jobs to get involved in the debate. Property values are generally lower here- who cares if they go lower. And why should we care about Waltham (yes, I’m being sarcastic)? You won’t find developers or their wealthy lawyers living in this section of town. Just my observation.
P.S. Some folks here conflate the right to carry firearms with a nearby gun shop which depresses property values (at least it does for me personally, not sure what the stats say).
MROffice21 – So how does the Chestnut Hill location fit into that story?
@Jerry Reilly Really doesn’t matter. Even if an applicant was able to meet the ridiculous, over reaching requirements for a “special permit”, the anti-second amendment activists will put an enormous amount of pressure on the property owners to not lease out any space to a gun store.
The clincher on that is that it absolves the city of any liability or accountability… ‘Hey, we granted the special permit. It’s not on us if the property owner exercised their rights and chooses whom to rent to, or whom not to rent to. A gun store is not a protected class’.
A gun shop will not negatively impact property values, even, perhaps especially in Newton.
So, I am troubled by ad hoc zoning that effectively deprives property owners of their development rights after they announce their intentions.
Gun store opponents may hate me for this. But I embrace your hate. Fair is fair.
@ted… surprised at your stance… and very impressed. Not that I am supporting gun stores in general, but you bring up a very valid point. #LikeButton
@Ted Hess-Mahan is 100% correct. We are supposed to be a society of laws. The business owner followed the law to obtain his store permit.
All of you who want to run this shopowner out of town:
1. I understand you don’t like what happened. Blame your elected representatives, because they’re the ones who created the system of laws that provided this result. We are supposed to live by the laws we create, not reverse them to target one person or one business.
2. The tactics you are using could just as easily be used against a mosque, synagogue, or abortion clinic. Do you think that would be okay? But wait, you will say, people have a constitutional right to worship or to obtain an abortion. Guess what? People also have a right to buy firearms (and yes, our Federal courts have repeatedly held that the 2nd Amendment prohibits governments from banning gun sales). I understand you don’t like that, but such is our Constitution. If you don’t like the Constitution, you can have it amended, but you will have to follow the rules. And if you can’t find enough votes to amend the Constitution, too bad, you live in a democracy, and that means you don’t always get everything you want.
3. Your willingness to throw away the rule of law is alarming. You’re the modern equivalent of torches and pitchforks. Mob rule.
@Ted
I don’t see anyone suggesting laws should be broken. To the degree zoning changes are legal, then let’s take full advantage of the laws as written. If there is lack of clarity, the gun shop owner has full right to take the City to court.
You may have a view on legality, but that’s simply your opinion.
@Boatie
We’re following the laws by changing the zoning. Blame your representatives for writing the laws in a way where zoning can effectively be used as way to prevent undesirable businesses in communities.
Rule of law, buddy.
@Boatie, the gun shop owner apparently started construction without a building permit, so he did not follow all of the laws.
@Matt, I try to be principled and consistent. I would take the same position if the City Council tried to change zoning to prevent an affordable housing project (which in fact happened when some of the Catholic churches in Newton closed).
@Alec, I did not say it was illegal, only that I was troubled by what I perceive to be “ex post facto” legislation. I still hope that the gun shop owner decides to go somewhere else and that the City Council does come up with a plan that would put gun stores in appropriate business zones far enough away from schools and residences.
Ted is 100% correct. This is how bananna republics work, not well-run cities. It sets a bad precedent. Why would a business invest time and money to open in Newton, if fickle officials might change the rules mid game?
I don’t have a gun and I don’t like guns. It is not about guns. It is about respecting the law.
BANANA = Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything
@Ted fair enough re: legality.
@Ted @ Jeffrey 100% intellectual consistency is a fool’s errand. Most business don’t sell a product that leads to so much death and despair. The presumption that businesses would be less likely to come to Newton because we did a one-off zoning action to fend off a gun shop is silly. It’s also silly to suggest a slippery slope that other businesses would be subject to a similar “retroactive” action, there just isn’t any real indication that would be the case.
People make mistakes. The proposed zoning for gun shops should have already been in the books- who would have thought a gun shop would want to set-up in Newton? So our options are: let the shop exist contrary to our values, but remain 100% principled on zoning actions, or acknowledge our mistake to not have this addressed before and put the new zoning in place.
Again, this is an outlier business that leads to deaths of innocent people, let’s not have academic arguments get in the way of the right action. The slippery slope arguments aren’t real.
If no one in Newton wants a gun shop there, then just let it open and it will soon close for lack of business. Problem solved. Of course, perhaps there are plenty of residents who would like to have this business nearby but it’s much easier to just claim that no one wants it there than to actually engage in a little critical thinking.
Why I appreciate the legal arguments, we do provide spot zoning on all sorts of other “special categories”. Adult entertainment like strip clubs. Pot shops. Liquor Stores.
And logically I’m swayed by “ex post facto” argument like Ted. But in a very limited fashion. If he is being held to leasing the space by his landlord, that seems very unfair. I’ve got little sympathy for his build-out costs, since he didn’t pull a building permit. Ideally, the lease was written in a way that it unwinds if it can’t be used as a gun shop, and he can lease space elsewhere (now with zoning clarity) or if he feels that he has been wronged with ex post facto unfairness, sue Newton. Banana republics don’t have the courts folks. Let’s not self-flagellate ourselves too much…
I wonder if this would have attracted a lot less attention if it was a hunting/fishing/gun shop. I see those a lot, and frankly many of them sell a wide range of guns.
Anyway, I won’t shed too many tears for this particular business, which couldn’t be bothered following the building permit rules, and seemed to embrace the controversy more than try to defuse it.
And I’ll keep an eye out for that slippery slope, where Newton starts to ban churches and such. I’ll raise the alarm when that happens, don’t you worry. (I’m not worried at all about the slippery slope because it doesn’t really exist in realty, but don’t tell anyone).
Also, Boatie, I guess it is mob rule, if mob rule is a large percentage of the community protesting to its elective representatives, who then put forth legislation to be voted on to address the concern, which gets approved, which then impacts a business owner in a negative way that said group of residents want, thus increasing the odds that said elective representatives will be re-elected to future terms.
You know what you should do? Gather a bunch of OTHER members of the community and convince folks that our current elective representatives don’t represent the will of the people, and vote them out!
But until that happens, pretty much what I see is the democratic process, with the business owner having the right to sue in court. If you are correct with your constitutional argument, he will win there, and be able to open the shop.
Pretty sure lots of 2A advocates know lawyers who can help. I doubt this would make a great 2A case. But what do I know.
You can certainly claim it isn’t the best way to run a city and that our zoning rules should have dealt with this earlier. But mob rule? Banana Republic? So dramatic! And also not true.
“Most business don’t sell a product that leads to so much death and despair.”
Go do some googling on how much death and destruction alcohol contributes to a year. SIGNIFICANTLY more than firearms. About 10K a year violently on the highways (with many innocent people making up those numbers), and 100s of thousands of others who succumb to abuse. But you all like to drink responsibly, so that’s cool. Be logically consistent at least.
Again, the opposition to this gun shop is partisanship, irrational fear, and primarily virtue signaling.
7-11 sells more products that result in death than any gun store in the country. So does Walgreens and CVS.
Boatie – the gun store owner didn’t follow the law.
Also, where’s the mob? Since when is people expressing an opinion a mob?
Mike, I’d be fine restricting alcohol more too. Breathalizers in cars would be great. As for abuse, I can’t do much about that, but I’d fund more rehab centers. Right now there is a huge shortage.
I will say that gun violence is a very American problem. There are costs to such free gun ownership, and to date we rarely study them as a country, since we won’t like what we find, and the funding is not available on the federal level.
I realize I can’t restrict gun ownership in America completely, like New Zealand did a few years back. But I can advocate for sensible restrictions, I can push to ensure gun purchase is done in a licensed manner, to educated people. You can certainly advocate for gun ownership, that’s fine by me too. Disagreement is part of democracy.
So yes it is partisan (most disagreements are!), yes based on fear (some of which is irrational I admit, but some of which has a logical basis) and I don’t really care if it is virtue signaling.
I suppose gun owners will have to go to the other 20 stores surrounding Newton to buy guns. I think it is a small inconvenience for those wanting to do so, and a very small victory for folks wanting additional restrictions for gun ownership in the community.
Life goes on. I’ll be excited for when Washington Street is finally further along in its transformation, and I won’t shed a tear for the lack of a gun store. (I’d still like a tackle shop though).
If liberals were so concerned about gun violence they would be slamming the desk for zero tolerance mandatory prison sentence for ANYONE caught with an illegal gun…
How about it? Or is this too tough on crime?
“I suppose gun owners will have to go to the other 20 stores surrounding Newton to buy guns. I think it is a small inconvenience for those wanting to do so, and a very small victory for folks wanting additional restrictions for gun ownership in the community.”
See this is just it. There is no lack of ability for Newton residents to purchase guns. Instead, this is an effort to screw over an individual who has already invested in becoming engaged in a lawful business selling firearms and accessories to (very well) vetted persons for numerous lawful outdoor activities, and yes, self-defense as well — for purposes of virtue signaling.
Another source of supply, and I would say not even an increase in supply, to compete with other local businesses in surrounding towns means more tax revenue for the city and jobs for Newton residents.
Mike- you’ve stated that you’re not part of this community, and instead live in rural Alabama.
Why are you on V14? This feels like classic trolling. This is a community blog dealing with local community issues. Not really clear why you’re here and what you’re trying to accomplish.
Mike – He didn’t follow the law/regulations on opening up a store. The business may be lawful, but this individual has shown from the get-go that he holds little to no regard for the law. Why should anyone trust that he’d follow more complex regulations?
There are some comments here suggesting that amending zoning rules to restrict and limit the opening of gun stores in Newton is discriminatory or runs afoul of the Second Amendment.
First, zoning laws by definition discriminate, for example between residential and business uses. Not all discrimination is improper or illegal.
As for the Second Amendment, yes, to many people’s astonishment, in 2008 the Supreme Court construed the Second Amendment generally to confer an individual right to possess a firearm. The Court focused on the traditional right to self-defense and did not view the language with which the Amendment begins —“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State . . .” — as an impediment to its ruling, despite the absence nowadays of state militias, much less well-regulated ones.
Heller does make it hard for communities to regulate the sale and purchase of firearms. But the right of a community to enact zoning laws, including ones that make it more difficult to open a gun shop, is not canceled by Heller. While again, generally there is a Constitutional right to own a gun, there is no Constitutional right to open a gun shop in the face of a well-crafted amendment to the city’s zoning ordinance intended to safeguard the essentially residential character of the community, one that is comprised of many “villages.” The zoning ordinance amendment does not impose a substantial impediment to buying a gun to anyone who wants one.
A convenient excuse to delay his opening to get the zoning changed ASAP.
It appears Emily Norton is going bold on this. If her strategy is successful I predict a very bright political future
Note to major: this is leadership
From Emily’s newsletter:
I do not agree with the approach of identifying locations in the City where a gun shop can open, because that means it will end up near people who have less power or influence to oppose it. Rather I believe we should ban the sale or manufacture of guns in Newton entirely, which is why I co-docketed an ordinance to do just that (#182-21)
Thanks to @Mike for driving this thread over the past couple of weeks – And all who posted. The dialogue has been thoughtful and helpful as I decided how I think about a gun shop opening in our community.
Although I share the frustration most of us feel over the gun violence in our country, I didn’t find one compelling argument in this thread for banning this proposed gun shop.
The only valid and honest reason I can see is that you simply don’t want a gun shop in your backyard. NIMBY is who we are here in Newton.
People supporting the ban want to make the business environment so bad, and the cost for this business to defend their rights so steep that they fold.
It doesn’t sit well with me. It feels like bullying. It feels similar to the republicans making it difficult for people to vote. It feels similar to not selling your home to a gay couple or a black couple because you don’t think they represent your values. It’s gaming the system to get what you want.
The issue isn’t about our community’s values, public safety, or the protection of our youth from the terror of seeing a gun shop. It doesn’t make Newton less safe. It’s simply people exercising their privilege and denying someone their rights to open a legal and legitimate business.
I have no use or affinity for guns. I’m all for amending the constitution to restrict guns. I’ve given my time and money to help empower troubled teens. I do, however, have an affinity for fairness, and what I expect will happen tonight is ugly.
@Mike Ciolino – I couldn’t have said it better
If Emily is planning to co-docket an item to not allow gun shops to open in Newton, is that even legal for a municipality to ban a business that, by all rights, has legal authority to operate in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Looking forward to the long and protracted lawsuit if this happens using Newton taxpayers’ money to defend against what would seem to be an obvious losing battle. It also would seem like a very slippery slope if legally operated gun shops were not allowed to open at all.
I’m curious to hear from an attorney familiar with business law who could chime in on this matter.
Disclosure: I am for strong gun control.
Is there any precedent for a total ban somewhere else in the country?
My problem with Emily Norton is she is using the Alameda County case to justify her complete ban. What she fails to mention in that case is that there were already TEN gun stores in their jurisdiction. Many options for people to buy guys in said jurisdiction.
Our Jurisdiction in question has zero. The most bizarre thing and I also would question the legality of Counselor Norton saying we will just take the guy to court because it is expensive and could take years to go to the Supreme Court. She is also using tactics that Republicans use to shadow ban abortion clinics so I guess we live in a political climate where two wrongs do make a right.
I am in the camp that counselor Norton is well beyond her power and has acted irresponsible in this whole situation. Fear mongering, grandstanding with saying her children told her to stop the gun store or they will get shot in school, lying saying guns are easily accessible in Massachusetts (spoiler they are not), and lastly she is completely ignoring the legal teams advice of not pursuing the full on ban.
Another point what law firm would tell her no we will not take this case? Lawyers love getting paid and Newton has the resources to pay the hefty prices of Ropes & Grey. We will lose and the lawyers will just get the taxpayers money.
Counselor Norton should be censured and/or step down for her misuse of power. For someone who seems to be very against republicans she sure uses a lot of their tactics….