Update: Seems I missed the bigger picture. The Right*Sized endorsees are an explicitly coordinated slate. The image at the bottom of this post is the form used to request signs for more than one candidate. h/t to Adam.
That explains the consistent construction technique.
—
Back in the TAB blog days, there were periodic discussions about the wisdom of then aldermanic candidates running as a declared or implied slate. Lots of heated discussions. Now, it seems the question is settled. Candidates are highly aligned and local endorsements roughly follow the alignment. Even if not officially declared, slates are here.
But, as commenters would surely remind me if I didn’t mention it, just because candidates are aligned and just because endorsements roughly follow the alignment, doesn’t mean that voters vote the slates. Too true. Candidates on one slate or the other don’t all get the same proportion of votes. Candidates on a slate don’t all win or all lose. Voters have lot of reasons for selecting candidates. Those reasons may be, ultimately, independent of the candidates’ strategic thinking and the thinking of the chattering classes.
In the past, you’d see that voter independence reflected in lawn signs. You’d walk down a street and see signs on a single lawn that crossed slates. One might even pause and think, geez, how could somebody possibly support both A and B?!?!?!
This election seems meaningfully different. I’m not seeing the same kind of variability. Yes, there are some exceptions. I saw a Lisa Gordon sign hard by a Bill Humphrey sign, yesterday, But, largely I’m seeing high sign alignment.
There seem to be two notable exceptions. I’ve seen Ruthanne Fuller and Paul Levy signs mixed in with signs from both of the two sides, albeit with a noticeable tilt of Fuller signs with Vibrant Newton-/Engine 6-endorsed candidates and Levy signs with Right*Size Newton-endorsed candidates (where the Fuller or Levy signs are not the only signs on the lawn).
What are you seeing? Do lawn sign grouping seem more or less variable than previous elections? Seen any particularly odd combinations?
If you have seen a candidate’s lawn, what signs are you seeing there? Any cross-over signs?
A note about the Right*Size Newton-endorsed candidates: taller signs and shorter buildings, right?
The sign-up form from John Oliver’s website.
Perhaps more telling is when candidates hold joint campaign events, or even send out email promotions asking supporters to request one or more signs
Sean, I see a lot of my signs paired with Vicki Danberg’s, which I have concluded must have something to do with how many visits my daughters had for pediatric dental care with her husband!
The only strikingly odd one I’ve seen is this sign on my front lawn, despite the fact that the candidate has sworn off running for any more elections
Sean I can’t speak for Right Size because I’m not a member but I think you are dead wrong when you accuse them of wanting shorter buildings. My impression is that they believe in buildings that are “in scale ” with existing neighborhoods or will not cause undue hardships to the existing neighborhoods.
I can’t find anything that says that they want short buildings.
Once again you are making up stuff to support your candidates that are funded by wealthy developers who will give their public servants contributions in return for their support.
Jackson joe,
“Shorter” not “short.” I think I can’t state categorically that in any discussion about housing and other development, the Right*Size endorsees favor the shorter alternative. I’m happy to be proven wrong.
Also, the developer-made-them-do-it schtick is wearing thin. I wrote about it.
There is nothing thin about money buying elections. If people want to discount that fact, that’s there right but just like we look at who supports who, I think it’s fair to look at who contributes and how much to a campaign,
It’s not a question of a developer making a profit, the question is do we want good development or should we take whatever we can get
The inference that anyone that disagrees with your position is racist is much thinner than the amount of donations that the pro developer councilors receive from their masters
I am delighted to report that despite the obvious emergence of slates in city elections, the voters themselves, like me, are often heterodox in their choices. If you look, you will find lawns with three or four signs for candidates not uniformly aligned with the same bloc in our City Council. It makes sense to judge candidates, like all humans, one person at a time.
Bob,
Name names!
In all seriousness, can you provide some examples of the mixes you see out there?
Just have to say that Meryl Kessler’s lawn signs are by far the most visually appealing!
The RSN side is coordinating their sign campaigns very effectively. The Engine sixers don’t seem to be. In Ward 6, Vicki Danberg seems to be the only candidate for city council with any cross-over appeal. Good for her!
Bike around Waban and the Highlands and you will observe signs of candidates from both factions on the same lawn. In Ward 5, for example, I have seen a Bill Humphrey sign next to Pam Wright and Vicki Danberg signs.
On another note, today I biked from Commonwealth Avenue to Newton Wellesley Hospital for some blood work. That stretch of Washington Street, you might recall, was recently repaved. Apparently, the city didn’t consider accommodating cyclists in any way. If Newton truly believes in encouraging residents to drive less and bike more, then it should repair roads with bikes in mind.
@Bob, Pam is the “one of these isn’t like the others” which is why I am such a fan. Totally data based and non-idiological. We need to clone Pam!!
While some homeowners have mixed signs (which I agree is a great thing), that good faith political integrity quickly erode as Newton’s affinity groups – i.e. Engine 6, Green Newton, and the sham that is NGPVCwxyz – all endorse the same slat of candidates like a cliques in a high school cafeteria.
If these groups want to be true leaders of this community, they should do so by endorsing someone other than those already in the back room club. Actions speak volumes.
PS. Meryl does have a well designed sign. 😉
Matt,
In your flippant attempt at jaded cynicism, you malign a group of people who have been fighting for housing in Newton with great integrity for years: the good folks at Engine 6. You have been posting and commenting about housing for years. I feel reasonably certain that you know who Engine 6 is and what the group stands for. In case you don’t, from the Engine 6 web site: “Advocates for fair, affordable, diverse, and abundant housing in Newton, MA.” Engine 6 got their start advocating for transitional housing at the old Engine 6 firehouse in Waban, at the end of Beacon St. (hence the name). Engine 6 advocates for more housing because the group believes that we in Newton have a responsibility to address the regional housing crisis, because significantly more housing is necessary to solve climate change, and because social equity demands that we dismantle systemic racial bias. Read the press release on the endorsements: “These seven at-large and four ward-only candidates recognize that in order to be a truly welcoming and diverse community, Newton needs to build a lot more housing, both market-rate and affordable. They also understand that building more densely in places with easy access to public transit and amenities is critical to addressing the global climate crisis.”
Name a single race where Engine 6 made an endorsement and the not-endorsed candidate or candidates have a record or have made policy statements that are more consistent with Engine 6’s values than the endorsed candidate or candidates. Name a single race.
Attributing the endorsement to back-room relationships is a toxic attempt to delegitimize principled advocacy. Be better.
Vicki Danberg, Andrea Kelley, and Paul Levy all seem to transcend the sign cliques in my observations.
This morning I biked to my dentist in Chestnut Hill, and on the way back (I live in Waban) I saw a lawn near Parker Street with four signs: Ruthanne Fuller, Paul Levy, Vicki Danberg (she has supporters all over Newton), and Barry Bergman!
Yes, an independent streak runs through the soul of many Newton residents.
MMQC. I would agree with you in regards to Paul Levy. I can’t comment on Andrea Kelley because I just haven’t seen many of her signs as standalones.
In regards to Vicki, I have observed her signs in some seemingly odd combinations, but I chalk that up to the fact the she has been around so long and has such name recognition and relationships that non-ideological residents will agree to host her sign.
That said, you never see the one slate without Vicki’s sign right in there. But she does enjoy the benefit of incumbency, personal relationships and name recognition.
She also benefits in Newton Centre that the Zussman family, which owns much of the commercial property in the heart of the center(1280 Centre, 85-105 Union, 49-84 Union, 47-61 Langley and 790-794 Langley), will not allow any signs for any candidate other than Vicki Danberg on any of the properties they own, even if the tenant would agree to the sign. This isn’t conjecture. It was communicated in an email when rejecting a request to place a sign
That is one reason why you see so many stand alone Vicki Danberg signs in Newton Centre.
@Bob, The other candidate who is slaying it with signs is Kevin Riffe candidate for Ward Councilor in Ward One
Didn’t realize I was being flippant, Sean. 🙂
If I were to visit the homes of the leaders of Engine 6….if I were to visit your home Sean…would I find dense apartments, solar panels and a Prius?
Or would I find large homes, heated with fossil fuels, in single family neighborhoods, with SUVs (plural) in the driveways?
I’ve been called NIMBY, racist (despite being Asian) and worst, simply because I don’t believe in stuffing hundreds of apartments that primarily benefits already wealthy developers. Engine 6 hasn’t been Engine 6….since the original firehouse.
I’ve been attacked since my first comment years ago questioning Northland. Seen this blog ruthlessly and endlessly attack Emily Norton and Marc Laredo like piñatas at a birthday party.
I’ve earned the right to bit of cynicism. See you at the polls!
Sean – For just five minutes can you get off your high horse and give other people some credit?
The admins of the Gun Violence Prevention group worked incredibly hard and educated the community about the possible consequences for communities around the country of a ban. They were able to educate the community as to how an ordinance could get us what we need without the possibility of a lawsuit, and they did it under a crushing time constraint. Their sources were top-notch (the Giffords Center). They also happen to be individuals who have been committed to gun violence prevention for many years and are highly knowledgeable in their own right. The fact is Amy advocated for a ban, and in that action, lost an endorsement. Two of the school committee candidates’ answers to questions were simply more insightful and on the mark about possible future actions NPS could take.
Matt – You know I respect your opinion, but your comment directed at the very people who led the charge against the opening of a gun store on a main thoroughfare that is close to five schools was totally uncalled for – truly shameful. You speak with a strong voice, and I respect that, but you crossed a line on this one.
Matt, Jerry Reilly will probably take this down (again), but don’t forget that I called you a punk.
In my driveway, you will find no SUVs, but you will find an EV. I pay a premium to ensure that my electricity comes from 100% renewable sources. I can’t put solar panels on my slate roof, but I’m working on finding an alternative. I have strongly supported affordable housing in my own neighborhood (within a few hundred feet of my house), including the Dunstan East 40B, and chaired the JAPG that recommended that the city buy the West Newton Armory from the state for $1 and make it into 100% affordable housing.
You are a NIMBY. No one has called you a racist (although you are anti-fair housing). Councilors Norton and Laredo are champions of snob-zoning. Get over it.
Matt,
You’re changing the subject. You made an allegation. Now, back it up. Or, take it back.
Which candidate reflects Engine 6’s values and didn’t get endorsed?
Answer that, and I’ll be happy to discuss your silly gotcha argument.
Jane,
I’m totally confused by your comment. I wrote nothing about the Gun Violence Protection Group.
Jane Frantz – I think you may have posted your comment on the wrong thread
Sticks and stones Ted…sticks and stones.
If I had a nickel for every post on this blog that starts with, “Matt,”…
It’s amazing how this “welcoming community” and quickly turn, when opinion expressed is not one of their own….a different hue of blue.
My spouse and friends think I’m a glutton for punishment. But then there are the private messages from strangers who become allies if not friends, who don’t feel comfortable publicly sharing similar opinions.
So to the silent moderates in Newton…I got your back!
Mr. Lai,
You malign multiple groups of people, questioning their motives and calling them names, and then you claim the mantle of the victim.
Truly impressive pivot.
Now, again, back up your allegation. Name the candidates who share the Engine 6 values but didn’t get endorsed.
@Jane… 🙂
A lot of things can start at a good place the turn sideways.
But endorsing Sean when there is a clear conflict of interest is just bad optics. Then to follow that up…by withholding an endorsement for Amy (despite her own advocacy against guns) then last minute deciding to endorse Mayor Fuller (after giving her months of grief for not revealing her early knowledge of the gun store)…is everything that’s wrong with Newton politics.
We (and certainly not I) cannot take away their efforts in preventing a gun store in Newton, but as a PAC who endorses candidates, they have much to be desired.
Have great respect for you, but we can agree to disagree on this one.
Sean, from Engine 6’s site:
“We want to be a welcoming and livable city, but people of all ages, backgrounds, and occupations are struggling to keep or find a home here. Our adult children can’t afford to live here. People who work here can’t afford to move here. Seniors can’t afford to stay.”
Almost all of our candidates have some version of the same on their websites, in meet and greets and we’ll hear it in the upcoming debates.
It’s folks that are quick to paint anyone who has a different path to get there as, “anti housing” is where the rift develops and expands.
@Jane… sorry, I meant endorsing Shawn (Fitzgibbons). Jerry, any
chance we can get an “edit” feature on this blog?
Mr. Lai,
Specific candidate, please. Also, did you read the endorsement language: “Newton needs to build a lot more housing, both market-rate and affordable.” Which not endorsed candidate has said words substantially similar?
Sean, we can do this all night….
Not to pick on Jim, but only to make this one point…his campaign site has one…one vaguely worded bullet in regards to development.
https://coteward3.us/
Recent history would lead one to believe this endorsement had more to do with the fact that Jim is not Julia Malakie (another V14 target) than his own track record of pushing for density at all cost.
PS. This is not a knock on Jim. If I lived in Ward 3 and Julie wasn’t running, Jim would very much be in consideration!
Mr. Lai,
Thank you.
Great race to look at.
Councilor Malakie was the only one of 24 councilors to vote against the Fair Housing Act proclamation back in May. (Seven made the unfortunate decision to go “behind the rail” to avoid recording an actual vote.) In her remarks, Councilor Malakie said words to the effect that no one has a right to live in expensive towns and cities, a fundamental repudiation of her obligations as an elected official to “affirmatively further fair housing” as required by the Fair Housing Act. It is hard to imagine an elected official or candidate more antithetical to Engine 6’s values. An endorsement of anyone with half-way decent housing values would be entirely consistent with Engine 6’s values. Jim’s values definitely evolved in the right direction over the course of his term.
Also, endorsing Jim Cote fundamentally undermines your allegation that Engine 6 only endorsed the “same slat of candidates like a cliques in a high school cafeteria.” I don’t think Jim Cote considers himself part of any particular in-group in Newton.
You’re right, we could do this all night. Let’s. This is fun. Pick another race. (I may have to pick it up tomorrow. I’m old and need my sleep.)
Jim only became part of the in-group recently simply by being not Julia.
Sean,
“ The Fair Housing Act protects people from discrimination when they are renting or buying a home, getting a mortgage, seeking housing assistance, or engaging in other housing-related activities. Additional protections apply to federally-assisted housing.”
Nowhere in that statement does hit say, “Matt Lai should have 3 $2m home in Newton….because it’s fair”.
The Fair Housing act is less about entitlement than it is about preventing discrimination in the pursuit of housing. And before you go down the same old path of, “redlining is racist (blah, blah, blah)”… you no argument here. Redlining WAS racist, but not nearly as prevalent today as it was decades ago, and severely frowned upon in today’s society (thankfully).
Julia is a nice lady and I will l guarantee there is not spot in her well-meaning heart that would intentionally prevent someone from living in this community. To say otherwise, is not only false, but mean.
In the same vain, Jim’s heart is in the right place was well and Newton would benefit from either candidate, but as @MMQC said, “Jim became part of the in-group, simply by not being Julia”. And Julia has a thorough, well thought position on what will be Newton’s biggest topic immediately post election.
https://www.juliamalakie.org/zoning-redesign.html
The vote re: Fair Housing Act looked like it was as an “atta boy” to a bunch of hard working folks and mostly as a way to get the CC’s on record one way or the other for the pro housing folks can use it as ammunition in this election against those not in the Brat pack or Squad or high school clique (or whichever term you prefer).
Perhaps the CC’s who voted against it or were behind the rail objected to the theatrics, not the FHA itself. There is nothing controversial about the FHA.
@Matt I would suggest that you look at the questionnaires that the candidates filled out as opposed to relying on the website. Often a candidate’s site is just an overview and doesn’t get in deep into the weeds.
That said, when I look at the questionnaires it appears that Malakie didn’t submit one, which would, by definition, disqualify her from gaining the Engine 6 endorsement. You can see the full list here: https://e41e1075-3381-440d-9251-d60ce7113875.usrfiles.com/ugd/e41e10_8084368dd44149dc854a68b1bd01ca0e.pdf
As for redlining, I’m going to pull some wisdom from my daughter. She talks about the difference between equality and equity. It’s a pretty basic idea, but equality is assuming a level playing field, equity is assuming an unequal playing field and providing help to those who need it. Redlining created an equal playing field that persists today. We cannot achieve an equal future without offering equity today.
This is the problem for both factions of today’s City Council, although more problematic for the anti-housing side. Most are now members of the suburban social justice movement, the virtue-signaling woke left who don’t actually want to (or can’t) do anything about fair housing or the other causes they supported when they placed lawn signs to that effect (welcoming, hate has no home here) – at least while Trump was in office. And they wonder why they lack credibility.
Matt –
While the housing contingent has said some things that are seen as offensive to people who don’t totally align with their agenda, you’d have to be living under a rock not to hear the whisper campaign going on on the other side.
As for the other issue, there was a school shooting in Texas yesterday. It wasn’t visible on the front page of the digital Globe and wasn’t even included in the “Must Read” sidebar. I had to use the Globe search bar to find its article about it. This is how commonplace school shootings are. More importantly, they are not addressed in any systematic way in this city. It’s 2021 – 21 years after Columbine. There have been 231school shootings since that horrible day. We have to begin thinking outside the box about how to deal with the stress this situation causes students and educators.
Two candidates had some thoughtful new ideas for dealing with gun violence before a tragedy happens and how to address the social and emotional fallout from hearing about ones that occur. Read the questionnaires. The difference was clear. Frankly, the city councilors’ answers to the question of what can be done to stop the horror were also lacking in substance and innovative thinking.
I’ve seen Vicky Danberg’s signs on two empty lots (163 Winchester St and 34 Rachel Rd) both recent demos by developers. Any thoughts? Seems like an odd choice for a Candidate to place signs.
Mr. Lai,
You are simply wrong. “The Fair Housing Act requires HUD and its recipients of federal financial assistance to do more than simply not discriminate; they must take meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.”
I’ll have a post on the Fair Housing Act and the May proclamation in the next week or so.
@MMQC and @Matt Lai: To say that groups endorsed me because I’m not the other candidate is an insult to my body of work and 6 year record on the City Council. Reminder that my opponent only has a less than a 1 term record to run and no real body of work. I have been in housing for everyone for quite a long time having started out on a Habitat for Humanity Board, and spent many a day raising money for the chapter and working hands-on. Fast forward to the past 8 years where there are some developments I was for, and some I was opposed to for reasons other than saying “no.” My opponents record is clear that she does not favor any development, nor housing programs for those less fortunate, or anyone else. Right Size could be transparent and tell you how they wanted to endorse me in 2019, and this year, but ultimately didn’t. Imagine a candidate that is so well thought of for results and common sense thinking, that I could have actually been endorsed by all groups. Something to think about on November 2nd.
@Jim – no insult intended. If that is your impression, my apologies!
Simply going by your web site vs Julia’s. Looking forward to your upcoming debate(s). Go Sox!
Sean
It is boring to hear your repeated misrepresentations that anyone that disagrees with your housing position must be anti affordable housing, racist and violating the law.
I know that you are far to stubborn to actually listen and consider alternative points of view
@jackson Joe – I think your beef may be with HUD rather than Sean.
… or HUD and Sean 😉
Mary Lee,
I’d love to see the email, but you can imagine why the Zussmans support Vicki in the at-large race. She has a long history of advocating for significant improvements to Newton Centre. One of her opponents, Lisa Gordon, has an equally long history of advocating against anything but the most superficial changes to Newton Centre.
This goes back 20 years (?) to the Newton Centre Task Force, which became the Newton Centre Task Forces because Lisa and others were so adamantly opposed to the improvements that the main task force was proposing, including modest residential development over commercial.
If you were a long-time property owner in Newton Centre, whom would you support?
Vicki (and Alicia and Brenda) have been strong supporters of our local business community.
@ Sean, The Zussman’s are perfectly within their private property rights to limit electioneering on their properties. I just share the information as an explanation as to why we see so many locations with only Vicki signs. One might interpret that all these businesses support Vicki when in fact it is one family who owns all those business that support her.
I did joke with one tenant of a business that I will have to refrain from patronizing them while the sign is up and they assured me that they preferred no signs where there.