So far, the most heated discussions here have been around one School Committee race. There have also been some about the mayoral race, but I get the impression that most people went to this with their minds already made up – after all, this is not the first time the two candidates have run against each other. What I haven’t seen is any discussion of the contested City Council races. So here’s your chance. Let us know who you favor for City Council and why.
Let’s discuss the City Council races
by Meredith Warshaw | Oct 23, 2021 | Newton | 113 comments
The bike lanes on Parker Street are a game changer for cyclist in the southern half of the city. I believe Alicia Bowman was the main driving force for that, and she gets my vote. I want to see more of this kind of thinking in the city council.
It’s sad how divided our city council contests have become.
New comers never had a chance to introduce themselves, their biographies, good ideas, bad ideas, or expose their faults. Incumbents never came under scrutiny for their votes (on anything except growth), attendance, constituent services, good ideas, bad ideas, or any other metric.
Instead, from the moment they pulled nomination papers every candidate in every contest was instantly superglued to one slate or another.
All you have to do is look at the distribution of lawn signs to see how we’ve stopped evaluating candidates as individuals.
That’s not good for them or us.
For the peculiar group “The Friends of Crystal Lake” seeking to sue the City to stop the long overdue renovation of Levingston Cove, I and numerous friends and fellow disability rights activists are working to ensure that Ward 6 Candidates Lisa Gordon and Barry Bergman do not win election to City Council.
Openly and actively defying the Federal decree of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which compels municipalities to ensure safe and easy accessibility to all municipal buildings and public venues, negates any candidate to be elected to any level of government! Preventing accessibility is an egregious and illegal act. The ADA is an Act of Congress signed into the law of the land by President George H.W. Bush in July 1990.
It is instructive to note that as the Head Of The Charles Regatta (HOCR) continues its annual rowing event this morning, we fans see scullers moving under the John W. Weeks Bridge. Persons with disabilities are watching the HOCR atop the Weeks Bridge. In 2015, the Department of Conversation and Recreation spent $3 million to renovate the Weeks Bridge to attain ADA compliance. Ramps at both ends of the Weeks Bridge replaced stairs and include compliant hand rails. New accessible approach paths, along with lighting, restoring the river bank adjacent to the bridge and masonry upgrades helped shore up the bridge’s structure. Harvard gave $150,000 for the renovation of the Weeks Bridge.
The ADA is as much a civil rights law as it is a disability rights law. In fact, many leaders of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s helped disability rights activists and certain members of Congress craft the language of the ADA.
Our decades-long civil rights mantra is: If you ain’t with us, you’re against us! Peace.
Maybe if the councilors themselves stopped voting as a bloc us voters would not evaluate them as part of a slate?
Over and over it’s the same voting lineup in the council, unless it’s unanimous. Maybe the councilors should try to reach out more to one another?
I don’t know how I’m voting in most of the city council races. The candidates ending up in these pro vs anti development blocs have really made it difficult for me because I think I fall somewhere in the middle and it’s not my #1 priority.
Greg, I hate to say it, but you’re absolutely right. The super gluing of the councilors to each other’s slate is a problem. The reason for that is the bloated size of the council. The average newton citizen can’t figure out who to vote for because there are too many people to learn about. Our councilors have learned to make “parties” and now we have groups of signs on lawns making it easier for for everyone who actually votes. Our city government is opaque. With fewer councilors it would be easier for them to vote on the issues and represent the voters. This rot goes back years. And eliminating local representation is not the answer. We need a new mayor. We need light shown into darkness. Start with Amy Sangiolo. I’d move on with keeping Pam Walsh in her seat. A vote for Meryl Kessler is a vote for a developer. I’ve seen no comments on that debate but Pam called her out in their debate and Meryl responded with her husband, had no business in front of the city council “right now”. With Amy in office we’ll have more transparency and that will be a start in the right direction.
Thanks Casey.
I assume you recognize that you just illustrated my point. You’ve dismissed Meryl Kessler entirely using the development litmus test — and based on who she’s married to (a topic worthy of its own discussion) — without any acknowledgement of who she is as a person, her own career path, civic service, views on other matters before the city, or absence of any of those things.
And please don’t take this as an attack. It’s not intended to be. I’m guiltily of the same thing in selecting the candidates I will vote for on Nov. 2. There are candidates I barely know that I will never vote for that align with which lawns they’re on. I’m not proud of that but it is what I will do.
Who is Meryl Kessler married to, and why is it worthy of discussion?
Newtoner,
Meryl Kessler husband is one of the developers of Austin st.
Technically her family could financially benefit significantly as development increases in Newton. Ethically she would have to excuse herself from any vote that benefits her family financially
Also, its not clear to me if they’re was controversy over the CRAZY CRAZY cheap price the developer paid to the city for the Austin st lot and if there is anyconnection here. Someone else can clarify the facts
@Greg et.al. In the previous post about the area council debates, I made a point of noting my disappointment that the extensive comment section essentially focused on just 2 of the 11 debates that took place. I have no doubt that the good things you say about Meryl Kessler are true, but I plan to say some equally warm things about Pam Wright who has impressed me greatly during her two years on the Council. The fact is that virtually all candidates have had difficulty connecting with voters this election cycle and there’s more to it than just the appearance of slates. The continuing effects of Covid 19 isolation on families and institutions has been debilitating for many folks here. it’s also hard to focus too intently on local matters if you feel as I do that our American democracy is in grave and imminent danger in ways that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago. Newton’s capacity to grow and change for the better will not be entirely dependent on what happens here in 2 weeks, but what transpires nationally in the next two years could have grave and lasting consequences.
Kessler got a sweetheart deal on her recent development at 60 Temple St Newton. She got it for below assessed value (when does that ever happen in Newton) at $1.45 Million and is flipping it 4 months later for $5Million.
@Greg, I didn’t take it as an attack. I didn’t dismiss Meryl based on her camp nor on any other bias.
I dismiss Meryl based on the fact that I don’t trust her decision making capabilities as a city councilor won’t be tainted as a someone who shares finances with another person who directly benefits by having a spouse on the Newton City Council. Instead of questioning my voting rationale, please share with me the other side of the argument where the woman who has said she’ll help Newton “Build Back Better” won’t be influenced by Dinosaur Capital Partners.
@ Jean Leavitt, I am curious how you know that since it is an LLC. Is there a way to identify investors in an LLC?
There are several online sources showing Kessler as the owner of “Sixty Temple LLC”.
Maybe it’s because the city itself is divided, and the councilors represent those wards? Occam’s Razor?
My values include creating a sustainable and welcoming community to people of all walks of life, and as such I will be voting the Vibrant Newton slate.
One choice for me was malakie v. cote. I do think they both care about ward 3. I agree with Malakie’s concerns with the environment & tree canopy but I don’t think there’s anyone ‘against’ that. I was really turned off when Malakie voted against the Testimonial Commendation Marking Fair Housing Month, and wasn’t interested in reconsidering her position when I had a consituent meeting with her. I have my reservations about Cote, but I’m willing to support him and see what changes.
One of the partners in “Austin Street Partners” emailed one of my board members when I was the Mass. Chapter Director of the Sierra Club, to say that I was “embarrassing” the Sierra Club by not supporting the Austin St project. Trying to embarrass me? Trying to get me fired from my day job? I hope if Meryl is elected she takes a less bare-knuckled approach to development votes.
I’ve known Emily for 8 to 10 years and she has almost always been upbeat, engaging and a bit combative, but almost always as a true Happy Warrior. She told me of the effort to get her fired and I could see the toll it took on her as it would anyone who was subjected to such pressures. I can also attest that she wasn’t about to change her position, so it was a doubly tense and stressful period of her professional life. I wouldn’t post this if I didn’t totally believe what Emily told me and I also told her I wouldn’t post anything until she raised the subject herself. I’m glad she finally did.
Austin Street Partners sounds like a classy outfit.
I watched the workers struggle to get a corner of the building where the foundation didn’t quite line up with the prefab housing. I was standing there watching a crane lift the corner up while they were trying to get it to fit. No one else knew what was going on- people just blithely walking by – but I did. And I’m no expert. It may be routine but it sure looked funky to me.
Seems to be ok now, but I don’t want to know how the sausage is made.
Girard Plante has totally misrepresented my position on the Levingston Cove renovations. I support the Levingston Cove infrastructure project that will stop erosion and provide ADA compliant access. Some members of the Crystal Lake Conservancy and the Friends of Crystal Lake were concerned about the effect of the project on the environmental health of the lake. I believe that someone who wants to represent the ward needs to represent everyone who wants to be heard. I added my signature to a Department of Environmental Protection appeal to address the environmental concerns of these residents. There was never a lawsuit.
In the independent living disability community, there is a saying: “Nothing for us without us.” When I heard that the ADA compliant access wasn’t fully vetted by disabled residents, my wife, a physiatrist with 40 years of experience treating patients with complex disabilities, and I, an MS patient who uses canes to walk distances, noticed possible problems with access. We believe that the separate walking path, although aesthetically pleasing, limits wheelchair maneuverability getting around the fishing deck and in getting access to the fishing deck. We also believe that it may actually be easier for those fishing from a wheelchair if the railing height was lower. More details on the ADA regulations for fishing docks can be found at https://www.access-board.gov/ada/guides/chapter-10-fishing-piers-and-platforms/.
I want a project that protects the environmental health of Crystal Lake and provides ADA compliant access. I sent a letter to the City Council asking for a delay until all these issues were addressed. Vicki Danberg says I filed a lawsuit. She is wrong. My opponent and Girard Plante say I am against this project. The facts say otherwise.
(Well, this thread is certainly doing a lot to improve the tone on the forum…)
Bob, I appreciate you sticking up for someone you admire, and I certainly do not think it is appropriate or correct for anyone with business before the city council to ever involve a city councilor’s day job. (One correction Bob. I’ll note that this is not the first time Councilor Norton has told this particular story. I believe I’ve heard it told multiple times on this forum by Councilor Norton, and I’ve always said it was inappropriate behavior every time).
But in a similar disappointing vein, what Bugek, Casey, Jean Levitt, Newtoner, and Councilor Norton are doing in these posts is inappropriate as well. I do not know Meryl Kessler personally. I am not her friend. I do not know her husband either. But if the main criticism of her and her campaign is the business of her husband (a business that I believe she is not directly involved in), then she must be running a strong campaign indeed. Because last I checked, I don’t judge people by their spouses. And I certainly don’t confuse a strong female candidate for public office with her husband, and I don’t define her by her husband. And that is exactly what folks posting here are doing. Guilt by developer association.
And let’s talk about the insinuations being cast in the thread. I was very interested in the Austin Street project. Bugek, your post deserves to be called out. Implying that something improper happened on the Austin Street ground lease “sale” when you don’t remember the process involved insults a wider group of people than you realize. The city solicited multiple bids. There were 5 in all. There was a committee that narrowed those bids down to 2. The mayor picked the final one. And the project then underwent changes during the city council process (a fact that Amy rightfully trumpets as one of her best moments on the council.) The bid prices ranged from $0 to $5,000,000. The $5,000,000 one was larger and I believe was cantilevered over the sidewalk. $1,000,000 for a long term ground lease sounds low, until you factor in the public givebacks, including the public parking lot fully built out on the first floor, and the various affordable units built into the project. But Bugek, it was a VERY public process. If you want to criticize anyone, criticize Mayor Warren. I know I did, I liked one of the other designs far more. But if you are going to imply something, come with evidence, or don’t come at all. And come prepared to insult the entire committee who vetted those proposals.
And why do I care, Jean Levitt, about a real estate home sale on Temple Street? Again, what are you implying? Do you have anything else beyond the purchase and renovation of a home? You seem to be implying something unethical occurred, but for the life of me I can’t imagine what that is.
Let’s repeat for the cheap seats. Meryl Kessler is not her husband. She is not her husband’s job. Wanna know what her qualifications are? Let me help you. I pulled this from her website.
“–Commissioner, Newton Sustainable Materials Management (Solid Waste) Commission
–Chair, Newton Out Doors
–Board member/Clerk, Newton Community Pride
–Finance Committee, Temple Shalom of Newton
–Co-founder, Newton Halloween Window Painting Contest
–Former co-chair, Newton North School Council
–Former Treasurer & Membership Chair, Peirce School PTO
–Founding member, Global Education Leadership Fund
I received a B.A. in Public and International Affairs from Princeton, and an M.A. in Government and a J.D. from Harvard. I started my career as a practicing lawyer and then moved into legal and civic education. As both a nonprofit professional (Legal Programs Director at Discovering Justice) and a board member (Generation Citizen New England), I have been passionate about ensuring that all people—and especially young people—have the tools and opportunity to actively participate in civic life.
From 2013 to 2019, I was Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts. There, I was responsible for all aspects of running a statewide organization, including bottomline responsibility for budget and finances. Additionally, I oversaw LWVMA’s voter education initiatives and helped lead the fight to modernize and improve election laws here in the Commonwealth. My experience leading LWVMA underscored for me the importance of consensus-building, clear and frequent communication, and an analytical approach to decision making.”
From a quick glance, it seems like Meryl has deep ties to Newton, non-profit governance experience, financial governance experience, ties to Newton schools, and was the Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts. I’m sure I left out some things. It is a long list. She seems to my eye to be a very accomplished, publicly minded person. Good for her. Good for her for running for public office and doing all of these things.
If all you’ve got to complain about is that Meryl Kessler is married to a developer, it seems to me that you are doing her, and yourselves, a grave disservice. Who we are married to has meaning, but it does not and should not solely define us.
Sorry for the long post.
Fignewtonville
I was asking if there was controversy. It was a question
Bugek:
Your comment in full:
“Meryl Kessler husband is one of the developers of Austin st.
Technically her family could financially benefit significantly as development increases in Newton. Ethically she would have to excuse herself from any vote that benefits her family financially
Also, its not clear to me if they’re was controversy over the CRAZY CRAZY cheap price the developer paid to the city for the Austin st lot and if there is anyconnection here. Someone else can clarify the facts”
Asking a question by requesting information on the “controversy over the CRAZY CRAZY cheap price paid to the city for the Austin st lot and if there is any connection here” already includes the negative connotation, namely that there must be some connection between the too low price and the developer. Ask for controvery and you shall receive it with that type of framing.
Also, with any type of research (a simple google search) you’d see that Dinosaur Capital has properties all over MA. There are also strict rules about self enrichment. So when you say “Technically her family could financially benefit significantly as development increases in Newton. Ethically she would have to excuse herself from any vote that benefits her family financially”, I’d say technically, anyone could benefit, but so could the real estate brokers on the council, so could folks holding property, so could lots of folks. The key fact is in your second statement, which is correct and obvious. She’d have to recuse herself from votes that benefit her family financially.
@Bryan Barash, who lost 1, but 2if previous elections has started to weigh in. Does that help or hurt candidates that he supports?
Fignewtonville
Thank you for answering the question I asked. There was no controversy because the sale included the parking lot.
Simon, I like Bryan personally and I think this is unfair, but I think he ends up being a rallying point for the folks who have opposed him in the past. Sometimes after such a heated debate as was the special election, it is best to step aside and let the new candidates speak for themselves. Just my opinion.
I completely agree Fig.
There are plenty of potential risks involving conflict of interest in politics. Fortunately, many of them are illegal (unlike back in the old days, as a City Council candidate told us last election, when people ran for the Board of Aldermen so they could get side deals for properties that got special permits). Other potential conflicts are clear and visible, like having a potential financial benefit. Those have clear rules to follow. That is true here with Meryl Kessler. It’s people with conflicts we can’t see and don’t come forward that I’m far more concerned about.
Meryl Kessler has done an extraordinary amount of good things for the city. Not just high profile things, but important but invisible and thankless stuff. I don’t know her personally, nor her husband. Based on social media accounts, I’ve been looking for a woman arm in arm with the Monopoly man strolling around on Bramm Way. but I’ve just seen happy coffee drinkers sitting next to a development that I heard somewhere is the hellmouth. Didn’t see it myself, but maybe I got the wrong angle.
We sure do tie ourselves up with worry and suspicion alot in the face of talented people with a track record of service and doing the right thing.
I personally appreciate Meryl Kessler’s deep involvement with many aspects of the things that make Newton work. She’s got my vote.
Bryan’s voice has returned and is more caustic and haughty than ever. I voted for him, but he lost handily twice. I don’t think he is helping at all. He has been an alienating figure from the get go and his return along with a more aggressive tone is unnecessary and unhelpful.
Where are Bryan’s comments? I’ve been looking for a way to efficiently bucket the candidates and voting against his choices would be just the ticket.
He’s been back on FB and Newton groups after moving to Gloucester after he lost. I don’t know if this indicates that he has moved back to Newton or what, but his tone and behavior reek of sour grapes.
@ Girard
It’s sad to see Vicky Danberg and Brenda Noel spreading blatantly false information and not having the morality to either back up their false claims or issue a retraction.
If their false claims were made due to an honest mistake, I’m sure the voters would be somewhat understanding
@Fig. I always appreciate your comments and I think both of us will agree that candidates often cross lines they shouldn’t. I must have missed Emily’s public statements which may have come in one of my periodic time outs when I withdraw from all but the most basic news and commentary just to clear my head. Let me be clear. I wouldn’t have been overly upset if the person pressuring Emily had simply told her he would do everything that’s legal to defeat her next run for the City Council. The problem is that this one individual apparently threatened her at her workplace, not at the polls. Rightly or wrongly Emily may have concluded that most of her constituents wanted her to oppose Austin Street as it was being proposed. This one individual seemed to think that his power and resources trumped the will of Emily’s voters at least as Emily judged it. Threatening a person’s job and economic security is a bridge too far for me and I suspect for many other folks as well. Going forward, I would be hard pressed to trust anyone who would pull this kind of stunt, but I’ve never had a problem with anyone who has supported candidates other than the ones I’m backing. Life’s too short and we just might be on the same side down the road. You never know. It’s happened with me many times.
I am glad to see that Barry responded to set the record straight. And he did so in a way that is consistent with who he is: direct, measured, calm, and honest. He has no agenda other than make sure we are all represented.
One added quality that Barry has, as I have seen when he interact with voters, is that he is a man of good humor. When a voter offers an understanding of his position on an issue that is incorrect, he always addresses it directly, but always with a smile on his face. No one want to be told they are wrong, and we know we have too much of that right now. Rather he educates and offers additional and alternative information, that enablers to know that they have been listened to, but they may not have all the information.
Barry would bring some civility and a much needed voice for a broader swath of Ward 6 Voters
Bob, I agree with your comment. The behavior crossed a line. I think too often folks lose perspective when supporting or advocating for a particular cause, project or candidate. Better to take the long view as you seen to do.
I still believe my point holds on how Meryl is being treated. It is possible to oppose someone without defining her as a mere appendage of her spouse.
And I enjoy our discussions on here Bob and your comments, especially the historical ones.
Following up on Marylee’s comment, I was very confused by one of Brenda Noel’s answer’s during the debate where she said, to broadly paraphrase, that under the Faur Housing Act you can’t discuss the impact of adding housing because that’s a violation of the act. There’s a link to the answer buried in another thread about the weekend debates (sorry typing from my phone).
@Jackson Joe – not sure if this is the false information you were referring to, but I was certainly taken aback by the claim that the mere asking of the question violated the act. She then pressed further, interrupting when Mr. Bergman was speaking by announcing that they (moderator Attorney Matthew Yospin snd her opponent) were on dangerous ground by continuing any discussion, without providing any explanation other than that they were “lay” people and as an elected official she knew more. Hmmm
A rather unsatisfactory exchange imho. I admit no expertise in FHA so if anyone can provide any rational basis for why one cannot even ask questions about the impact of housing on infrastructure, etc I’m eager to hear please! Thanks—
Barry – You are waging a campaign for elective public office to serve all citizens of Newton. I do not aspire to be a politician. Nor am I in this life for a personality contest. Thus, oftentimes feathers will be ruffled because facts are presented to obstructionists hellbent on preventing safe/easy and legal accessibility to people long oppressed by an indifferent, mean-spirited system.
I am actively advocating on behalf of persons with disabilities for 41 years. I am living with a disability (Spinal Cord Injury since high school) for 47 years. I have become involved and engaged within the decision-making processes of my respective communities in Massachusetts and New York for 39 years. Within both the public sector (e.g. government) and private sector (e.g. nonprofits). Myriad experiences have placed me in positions to ensure the civil rights of persons with disabilities are never trampled. And the organizations I am affiliated with in Newton and in Boston are daily focused to win rightful results. A primary factor relating to the latter is harboring knowledge of Federal and State laws and regulations and knowing the language and fostering ongoing working relationships with State Legislators.
So, the onus is on you, Barry, to clear away any inaccuracies regarding the exact position The Friends of Crystal Lake clings to towards the renovation of Levingston Cove. Where are the “other designs” I learned about from Lisa Gordon in her mail this morning? What exactly is your intent and what is the language of your formal complaint to the Department of Environmental Conservation? What is their response (if any)? You and Lisa have raised still more questions about your actions in your e-mails to me. By the way: Numerous neighbors of Crystal Lake support the City plan and vehemently oppose your “alternative plan.” They claim to have seen your plan. May I see that same plan?
Oh, and the entire City plan to renovate Levingston Cove was presented before persons with disabilities at the September 13, 2021, meeting of the Newton Commission On Disability (COD)! The public is always welcome to attend the COD’s monthly meetings. I encourage you to visit the City’s website to click the link Commission On Disability and peruse the public documents of the members’ actions in September and from prior meetings.
Since September 1974, the Commission On Disability has acted as the vanguard for persons with disabilities in Newton. Mayors have come and gone. Councilors have come and gone. City staffers have retired. Presidents have come and gone. Members of the U.S. Congress have come and gone. Popes have come and gone. Governors have come and gone. Yet the COD has prevailed. The COD has staying power.
Forty-seven years espousing the civil rights of persons with disabilities. Changing archaic structures such as municipal buildings, schools, businesses, and various other public venues. The COD is a watchdog of the public trust as members vote to allocate funds from the Federally-funded Community Development Block Grant program to build or reconstruct all manner of accessibility projects. We broke down attitudinal barriers such as a sordid longtime ‘culture’ within City Hall that viewed persons with disabilities as not having possibilities. What we do today benefits Newton far into the future.
Peace.
@LisaP here’s a link to Councilor Noel’s debate answer saying that discussing the impact of development on NPS Schools and student enrollment is a violation of the Fair Housing Act:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGHlGwiOggI&t=8884s
Councilor Noel’s response during the Ward 6 debate raised several questions for me that I posted in the other V14 City Council election debate thread last week:
https://village14.com/2021/10/18/its-not-too-late-to-watch-last-weekends-debates/#comment-129776
These are the facts:
I have been on the Crystal Lake Working group for over five years and have played a part in the process of encouraging many of the changes to the various iterations of the plan that have resulted in the version moved forward
24-0 by the full City Council last week.
The requirement for ADA and MAAB (Mass Architectural Access Board) compliance was well explained above. Currently, the ramp grade to the fishing area is greater than 8%. In order to comply with ADA standards, the grade must not exceed 5% (and compliance for motorized wheelchairs may be even slightly lower). The “alternate plan” does not change the grade, so is not compliant, as its proponents claimed it was, and on which point I pushed back.
In order to comply, one of two things needs to happen in order to reduce the grade: Raise the fishing deck area, or lower street, which was not seriously considered.
@ Vicky
Where is the “lawsuit”?
If you can find it please show it to us, because everyone else thinks that it doesn’t exist and you made that up.
@Jacksonjoe-
Getting the facts straight- Vicky never mentioned anything about a lawsuit. Another poster who is not an elected official mentioned about a group “seeking to sue”. Your question should be directed at the individual.
@Jacksonjoe-
Getting the facts straight- Vicky never mentioned anything about a lawsuit. Another poster who is not an elected official mentioned about a group “seeking to sue”. Your question should be directed at the individual.
Sorry Bruce, I have a copy of her email that specifically says “Lawsuit”
Girard – I appreciate your work on behalf of the disability community. You deserve a lot of credit for speaking out for the disabled for so many years. I am glad you are taking a stand because I see a lot of work that needs to be done to make our sidewalks more accessible. Some are just plain dangerous. In regards to Levingston Cove, I am not advocating for anyone’s alternative plan. From an ADA compliant accessiblity point of view I would like to see the walkway and fishing deck combined to have one unobstructed surface. I also want Weston and Sampson to meet with all the residents one more time to alleviate all concerns regarding environmental impact to the lake and ADA compliant accessibility. The DEP appeal is just to request an environmental review. It doesn’t hurt to make sure everyone’s concerns are addressed. I want to see this project successfully completed and be something we can all be proud of.
The Fair Housing Act includes the prevention of discrimination based on Family status-
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/fair_housing_act_overview
Family status includes children, number of children, etc.
The question that was posed to me was about connecting our special permit approval process with over burdening our schools. It also assumed that the city is upside-down financially when new housing is built.
I disagreed with the premise that when the city approves housing to be built it is a “financial burden” on the city, or stated another way, that the city is financially “upside down” when new housing is built. There is evidence to the contrary.
To discuss the impact on schools during the special permit process is directly connected to family status, which violates the Fair Housing Act, and it’s bad form. The review of the special permit process does not include taking into consideration the impact on schools- nor can you build housing that discriminates by only approving projects that include studios and one bedrooms.
As I said in the debate and what I will leave you with here, is that as an elected official and a person who cares deeply about this issue, I am not going to link our housing decisions or our approval of special permits with the impact it may or may not have on the local school system. Thank you for engaging on this important issue and for the platform to provide even more detail on the topic.
It is the strangest thing to have this discussion about whether it is possible to design housing to discourage families with kids, while a Newton Facebook thread is all about the possible impact of Newton students leaving the public school system for private schools during the pandemic.
Housing and school excellence. Both really important issues. And then there’s the perennial “preserving Newton’s character” debate.
And you know what else is important, and is at the core of Newton’s real character? Families. Families are part of the bedrock upon which Newton’s community is built. Any policy that goes beyond predicting the future needs for schools, and other resources for young people, to actively discouraging families from moving to or living in Newton is short-sighted and counter to the values that have made Newton Newton.
With the deep family roots treasured by generations of Newtonians, creating policies that keep out families is like slamming the door on the people behind you once you’re inside.
Any legalities aside, we have a generational obligation to welcome and look out for all. That is the price of community. Our fare was paid by generations before us. Now it is our turn.
@Mike Halle- I completely agree with you. Part of the joy and pride I have in living here is knowing that my great grandfather built the home my grandmother was born in over on Parker Terrace, that he worked the land with his hands as did my grandfather, while another part of my family helped to construct Sacred Heart in Newton Centre. I feel connected to this City through my family’s history here.
That said – I think it really a bit silly to take the position that you cannot even have a discussion about what if any anticipated impacts there will be with added housing. If there is an increase of density in a particular area presumably that is going to have an impact on water, sewer, fire, trash collection – a myriad of city services. Similarly, the school system does make student projections – of course. Those I think are pretty critical to anticipating how many classes of a particular grade city wide will be needed in future years. I understand that the City is also required to provide a plethora of socio-economic and demographic data to DESE annually relating to NPS students.
So, rather than speculate, below I am posting the precise question asked by Matthew Yospin, Esquire, moderator of that debate. At the links above anyone who wishes to see the candidates answers may view them. As we like to say, the video speaks for itself. The Fair Housing Act prohibits policies that have a discriminatory effect upon protected classes of individuals – that principle of law is unequivocally clear notwithstanding the prior administration’s attempt to dismantle the disparate impact rule. But to the point: I do not believe that there is anything – anywhere in the policy or any cases interpreting the FHA that hint as Ms. Noel did that it is a violation of the FHA to even ask the question presented by Mr. Yospin. Robust debate and discussion of government policy is the essence of the First Amendment and I would be shocked to see any actual legal support for this claim.
Mr. Yospin:
So, related question, I don’t want to go through too much background for it but bearing in mind what the average revenue is for the city from different types of residences, and from commercial properties, and given that our city has over a billion dollars in unfunded OPEB (other post employment benefits) liability, does it make sense to pursue a policy that will see the city’s costs quickly outpace the city’s tax revenue with different types of housing leading to different levels of revenue per housing unit and on average the costs imposed on the city for city services, primarily the costs for the schools which run about $20,000 per student in Newton Public Schools?
Yospin summarized the long question as follows: “Sorry Barry, my question was kind of long, I know. The question is does it make sense to you pursue a policy that will see the city’s costs increase faster than its revenues – particularly also with regard to housing and building multi-unit housing developments rather than say commercial properties.
@bruce c and @jackson joe – I have also been forwarded a copy of the email where Vicki says “lawsuit.” I guess it is making the rounds. I would like clarity on this lawsuit.
@Mike Halle please point to where in my post I refer to housing policies to exclude families.
As you know from exchanges we’ve had on the WN email list serve, I strongly believe housing /development planning should not happen in isolation.
This will help ensure Newton fulfills our moral obligation to provide vital municipal services like an adequate education for all public school children – those living her and those who come. A right enshrined in MA state Constitution.
Despite Council Noel’s statements to the contrary, student impact analyses are included in special permit fiscal analyses done under the direction of the City Planning Dept. It was done for Riverside and for Northland.
In 2019 and 2020, I asked Mayor Fuller and President Albright to consider planning on an area-wide basis for neighborhoods where large housing growth is expected like those along Washington Street vs. waiting for big projects to be proposed which is the current practice.
Hence my concerns with Councilor Noel’s debate answer and recent post. If we are not looking at all (never mind planning ahead) there risk that the City may not be ready to meet our obligations grows.
(NOTE: My initial post also acknowledged asking about household family makeup for an individual would be a clear FHA violation. The FHA prohibition against looking at potential enrollment in a general policy making sense remains an open question)
KUDOS, Meredith Warshaw!
You initiated a thread to discuss the election and re-election to the City Council. The comments about myriad essential issues daily impacting all citizens residing in Newton are a healthy show of democracy. Discussing and debating the issues of the day must occur in the ‘public square’ no matter its format or, nowadays, platform. Democracy ain’t easy!
Yet it IS worth fighting for and dying for.
It is GOOD to COMMUNICATE about the weighty matters that are oftentimes difficult. Exposing racist tendencies, for example, brings pain albeit SOLUTIONS to overcoming that ages-old problem. So, continue bringing awareness about the important topics about City governing and neighborhood concerns. Only then can we collectively collaborate on creating safer, healthier, inclusive, better community.
Peace.
Lisa-
This idea that Councilor Noel disregarded anyone’s first amendment rights or could not ask the question seems contrived. Councilor Noel stated that she disagrees with the premise of the question that current housing policy is a burden on city services. As she stated above, she did not answer whether housing policy should be calibrated according to how many students may enroll in NPS because it would be a violation of the Fair Housing Act to enact policy based upon this criteria. I found her answer to be straightforward.
Bruce – the debate reply reduces to No it should not be calibrated. So I agree the takeaway is straightforward.
@Bruce C,
What I think is perhaps contrived is the answer offered by Ms. Noel when she proclaimed discussion of housing in relation to any increase in school enrollments to be a violation of the Fair Housing Act. But don’t take my word for it – I’ve transcribed her words for those who don’t want to bother watching the video. I did not include her opponent’s answers because they aren’t at issue here. What I found quite interesting was Ms. Noel’s interruption while her opponent was speaking to announce that they were on “dangerous territory” because they were discussing schools and the Fair Housing Act. Again, I would challenge anyone to come up with any genuine legal authority that supports what Ms. Noel said during the debate as set forth in my (not contrived but translated to the best of my ability) transcription below.
Matthew Yospin, Esquire
So, related question, I don’t want to go through too much background for it but bearing in mind what the average revenue is for the city from different types of residences, and from commercial properties, and given that our city has over a billion dollars in unfunded OPEB (other post employment benefits) liability, does it make sense to pursue a policy that will see the city’s costs quickly outpace the city’s tax revenue with different types of housing leading to different levels of revenue per housing unit and on average the costs imposed on the city for city services, primarily the costs for the schools which run about $20,000 per student in Newton Public Schools?
Yospin summarized the long question as follows:
“Sorry Barry, my question was kind of long, I know. The question is does it make sense to you pursue a policy that will see the city’s costs increase faster than its revenues – particularly also with regard to housing and building multi-unit housing developments rather than say commercial properties.
Brenda Noel:
“So Matt, that was a long and interesting question. What struck me about it, and I’m not sure if the person who wrote it intended that, as you mentioned though, overburdening schools with costs, and I just, the question in and of itself is a violation of the Fair Housing Act – that we don’t build housing with a minds’ eye to how many children are coming, or what the impact is gonna be on schools, um so the numbers that you stated now twice that you know, we’re gonna be upside down with our costs if we build housing I’m not sure that’s consistent with the studies that I’ve read. Um, and I just wouldn’t work from that assumption that, you know, we’re gonna be upside down in city resources or somehow it’s going to bankrupt the city to build more housing, I take issue with that fact.
Matt Yospin: Okay. Do you wanna answer the question?
Brenda Noel:
Uh, but the question’s based on the premise that if we build housing it’s somehow gonna be a burden to City, I just don’t agree with that. I don’t think it is gonna be a burden to the City.
During answer to follow up question by Barry Bergman Ms. Noel interrupts at 2:30:55
“I think we’re on some dangerous territory here. I would really be careful. It’s a violation of law to talk about housing and the increased burden on schools. And it’s really just bad, bad policy.”
Matthew Yospin: “Sorry, it’s a violation of law?”
Brenda Noel: “Ya, it’s a violation of the Fair Housing Act. We don’t talk about, we don’t talk about the number of kids we’re gonna be putting in our schools when we build and approve housing. We simply don’t.
Lisa, thank you for taking a little time to describe your family’s connection to Newton. It was an aside, but I wish in the middle of all the political tussles we get into in this city, we have more reminders of what makes us the people, and the community, that we are. When we talk about the foundations of society, it isn’t just figurative. Real living people built the literal foundations of our city, and their stories shape both our neighborhoods and our neighbors.
In trying to get a handle on the argument in this thread (which is separate from the housing issue?), I can guess it comes down to a difference between whether characteristics of development units that constrain family size can be considered as part of special permit deliberations. I.e., is such consideration forbidden under FHA, or is it a policy issue that can be debated. Is that right?
This issue certainly touches on several important issues. And there’s a fair amount of subtlety here (is the use of numbers for projections allowed for planning budget and not allocations, but not for approving the development itself?) and, yes, some real practicalities at play.
But taking a step back….this isn’t a policy question, it’s a politics and elections question precipitated by a candidate’s debate. As an outside observer, this doesn’t seem like the kind of issue that is best approached by dissecting exchanges in a 20 minute debate. It’s deep in the weeds for most people; I don’t know if resolving this particulars and exactly who said what at this level of details gains or loses anyone any votes. It’s the kind of thing well-meaning people on either side could easily get some of the details wrong without it impacting policymaking in any way.
Re: Noel – It’s her smug, self-righteous attitude that is the issue.
@Mike Halle @fig I think you both hit the nail on the head here. I am glad you spoke to Meryl’s many impressive accomplishments and her dedication to this city. It is entirely unfair to her and to the conversation in Ward 3 to reduce her to who her husband is. I plan on voting for Meryl both because of who she is and what she brings to the table, but also because of Councilor Wright’s comments as a proxy for Councilor Malakie regarding LGBTQ+ representation in zoning discussions.
When I think about the moment we are in, I feel that Meryl is the representation we need on the City Council. Between Newton Out Doors and Newton Community Pride, I have rarely been to a public event or seen prideful upgrades to our city that Meryl did not play a role in and she led the LWV efficiently and effectively.
Also, I am not someone who makes my decision of who to vote for because of endorsements, but I was happy to see that Councilor Grossman and Former Board of Alderman President Brooke Lipsitt are supporting her. Becky I feel to be a councilor that has managed to bridge the “slate game” and whose voice I greatly respect, and Brooke who led the Board for years and accomplished so much for our city.
@Lisa If you think it’s self-righteous to care about discriminatory policies then perhaps we have a different issue.
And @Lisa Parlagreco, I would disagree that her opponent’s answer isn’t at issue here. The fact that he says he knows nothing about the FHA is absolutely pertinent when it comes to assessing who is already working hard to understand the ins and outs of these important, COMPLEX issues. Is that not how you assess your candidates? Or (at the risk of sounding snarky here) do they get the Hillary Clinton test which may result in being called smug and you not wanting to grab a beer with her? At the end of the day, you either want a policy maker who wants to be thoughtful about how we frame matters of policy or…not.
@Claudia – I could have been clearer – I thought an earlier poster was suggesting that Ms. Noel had not said what I was suggesting she did say with regard to FHA. Yes indeed, Mr. Bergman’s answers most certainly matter and for voters in the ward I would urge people to review that entire debate and not just snippets I transcribed. I don’t agree that Mr. Bergman “knows nothing” about the FHA; but he certainly can’t be accused of misrepresenting it.
That said, I find it absolutely stunning that an elected official would not only declare a question submitted during a debate to be “illegal” but then she attempted to shut down her opponent’s answers during a debate based on what I would respectfully suggest is a misunderstanding of a very important law. I want policy makers who are WILLING TO DISCUSS DIFFICULT ISSUES. I absolutely do not want policy makers who demand that debate and discussion be shut down effectively because they have some notion that the mere discussion of a topic somehow is a violation of law (and a complete lack of awareness of the breadth and scope of the First Amendment, thank you very much). That to my mind is utterly outrageous and the absolute antithesis of good governance, thoughtful discussion, working toward consensus and trying to thoughtfully move forward on behalf of one’s constituents. I can only hope that the council does not tolerate that sort of behavior in its chambers.
So yes, I want policy makers who are not only thoughtful but also respectful of others – especially those with whom they disagree. Sometimes those are the people we need to listen to most closely.
@Fig
You make a point of calling out bad behavior from blog commenters yet remain (initially) quiet on the revelation that Austin St Partners apparently looked to have Norton’s job threatened in real life? Seriously?
And you’re confident that ASP was selected on the merits too, after hearing about that despicable behavior? 4 million less for their bid, and no good explanation why they were chosen- go read Mayor Warren’s documentation on the selection, there isn’t a clear explanation why ASP was chosen among the two equally scored finalists.
ASP’s behavior is completely a legit election issue with Kessler married to one of the partners.
@Mike Halle-
Just saw your lovely comment, and thank you. Yes – in the rough and tumble of the season it is too easy to forget that we’re not just voters we’re people. Or as I say in my work, these aren’t cases – they are people.
And you are absolutely right – it’s best to try to remember to zoom out from the micro towards the macro view which I agree doesn’t include the minutiae of the FHA, but is going to require all 24 of them (heaven help us) to get along in some fashion or other going forward… And November 3rd can’t come soon enough. ;) Wishing everyone a great, snark free (maybe V14 free Haha) relaxing evening.
PS How is that behavior from ASP legal? Is there not legal jeopardy for the particular individual who did that if proven in court of law?
Ted Hess Mahan? Others?
Greg Reibman: Is the Chamber comfortable with those tactics? Isn’t ASP a member of the Chamber? Shouldn’t this disqualify them from membership?
Alec, you might want to reread my comment. From the first time Councilor Norton mentioned it on this blog, I said that behavior is inappropriate and shouldn’t have happened. How many more times do I need to say that? It wasn’t my bad behavior, and I certainly do not and have not defended it. If you want to criticize, read first might be in order.
As for the selection being on the up and up, I am just aware of the overall process, the 5 possible selections, the ultimate cut to 2 by the committee, and the mayor making the final choice. My recollection is that Mayor Warren put a lot of emphasis on the green nature of the construction, something I didn’t care for because it impacted the design. In addition, the size and number of apartments were different, as was the design on site. Sounds like you weren’t all that involved and don’t know the details. That’s fine, but I don’t think you should be casting stones and saying something improper happened.
As for your insistence that Meryl Kessler be judged on the actions of her husband, I’ve said my point of view in detail above. Folks can vote as they see fit. I judge my candidates on their own records and activities and I don’t view folks as extensions of their spouses. If her marriage to a developer is what you choose to vote on, that’s your choice. I hope the readers of this forum choose differently, or at least consider a wider lens in which to judge a candidate.
@Fig
Sorry- missed your half-line where you noted that ASP was not “appropriate” before you moved on to suggesting moral equivalence with blog commenting. (LOL!! If it wasn’t so depressing.)
Again to the others- how is that behavior not criminally liable if proven true? Interfering in a quasi-judicial process?
@BobBurke Why did you, Chris Pitts and/or Matt Yospin pull the FHA question from the remaining debates? Transparency please.
It’s a safe bet that most folks on V-14 would never vote for an election denier who denigrated democracy by seeking to overturn official voting results… Or maybe it’s not a safe bet at all.
In 2016 the people of Newton voted to legalize cannabis for adult use. But by a 22-0 vote [with 2 abstentions], the Newton City Council effectively overturned the election results through a moratorium. The Council hacked away at the explicit instructions given them by the voters, then placed two competing legalization initiatives on the ballot. These two new initiatives were deliberately designed to reverse or tamp down legalization in Newton.
Long story short, the City Council got their comeuppance when voters rejected both new ballot initiatives, and reaffirmed the original vote for cannabis legalization. Having failed to stop legalization, a group of city councilors then set out to undermine implementation of the law by making cannabis shops jump through hoops to get their licenses. That’s why only one new shop has opened in Newton in the five years since cannabis was legalized. To date, licensing delays have cost the City of Newton between $5M-$10M in lost fees, taxes and revenue.
At least two prohibitionist councilors lost their seats in the last election. Another decided not to run after showing up at a rally to block medical marijuana. None of the other councilors [at the time] have ever truly been held accountable for trying to overturn the election, disrespecting voters, and costing taxpayers million$.
I’ll admit, I’m far from a perfect person. But I do have integrity. And I’ll be damned if I’ll vote for anyone who undermined our election system by trying to overturn voting results. While I’m confident I am not the only one who feels this way, I’m afraid most Newton voters will never recognize that many council members have no more respect for democracy than Donald Trump. If councilors who voted to overturn the 2016 election genuinely respected their constituents, they would admit their mistake and apologize to voters… I won’t hold my breath, but I will be leaving a lot of blank spaces on my November ballot.
@Fig: I am sorry if I’m boring you by repeating the story about Austin St Partners telling my day job I was embarrassing them by not endorsing their project. But there may be some V14 readers who were not aware that this happened, and so for their benefit I am willing to risk a few minutes of tedium for you.
@Claudia – Thanks for that. I should have said rude, smug, self-righteous attitude.
Councilor Norton, I didn’t say you were boring me, not at all. Bob said it was the first time you told the story. I just said that I had heard it before. If I was in your shoes, I’d tell it multiple times too. There should be a separation between a city councilor’s day job and his/her/their votes on the council. It is a form of doxxing, similar to what overzealous folks due to some online commentators when they don’t like their online speech. I’ve experienced that as you might remember, so I condemn the behavior in whatever the form. Trying to get folks fired or personally hurt to win the day before the city council or to win an online argument is unethical behavior. Full stop.
Also, if my life was so interesting, would I be posting multiple times on an online blog? Tedium is my middle name lately…
I noticed that you didn’t respond to my objection to how Meryl Kessler was being treated. Surely an oversight. Perhaps we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that behavior.
Progressive Newton: Please remember that the debate moderators are volunteers. They did an excellent job and it is a lot of work. I’m not even sure I understand your request. The debate was fully transparent.
Mike, I agree with you, but I think the numbers that have come in from other communities don’t show the benefits you’ve outlined in terms of lost fees, especially now that so many stores are up and running.
@Progressive Newton. Rest assured, I didn’t pull any questions from any of the debates and I doubt that anyone else did either. I do know that we were running behind schedule on Saturday afternoon and the response times by candidates on some of the debates questions had to be shortened as a result. My responsibilities ended when I submitted my proposed questions to Chris and the rest of the gang who actually did the technical work of putting the program together. That said, I did participate in four excruciatingly long Saturday morning zoom sessions where we debated all of the proposed questions. Some of my questions made the cut and others did not.
Alec, threatening a Councilor’s employment as the result of a potential vote would be inappropriate. Details matter, though. That’s why it is important to litigate the issue (in either the figurative or literal sense of the word) in a timely manner while details (who was involved, what was said, how the information came to light) are fresh. For whatever reason, Councilor Norton chose not to pursue the matter at the time. The opportunity to fairly pursue truth and consequences is likely lost. And to be clear, I don’t doubt Councilor Norton. We just don’t have a full accounting of the situation.
But that’s not the issue. Meryl Kessler, a candidate with a strong history of service to Newton, is in the ballot. Austin Street is not on the ballot. Candidate Kessler’s spouse is not on the ballot. Apparently the candidate’s record of accomplishment is too difficult to challenge, so the argument is reduced to “someone in her husband’s business partnership is alleged to have made a call that if true was personally and/or professionally wrong”.
Sounds like Meryl Kessler is pretty formidable.
I am going to call out Councilor Norton’s comment in this thread, though. “I hope if Meryl is elected she takes a less bare-knuckled approach to development votes.” I hope none of our Councilors or other leaders resort to bare-knuckled approaches. This comment was a bit of a sucker punch in itself, albeit a fairly light touch.
Unless the Councilor is saying Meryl made the call in question, or for example that Meryl has shown a history of aggressive tactics as a Commissioner at Solid Waste Commission, or that she was shaking down parents as Treasurer of her kid’s PTO, maybe we can go back to this campaign’s issues and the actual candidates’ positions on them. :)
@Mike: what options did I have to “pursue the matter”? I alerted our Law Department. Apparently it’s not illegal to contact the place of employment of a sitting city councilor (at that time, alderman) in order to pressure them to vote the way you want.
@emily. I don’t remember you coming to the aid of Greg Reibman when Save Nonantum came after his job.
https://village14.com/2021/04/16/sore-winners-post-election-campaign/
On the contrary you added fuel to the fire.
“It’s not just about Greg’s voluminous statements about me. There are other individuals who have felt belittled and demeaned by him. Bugek says “I like his brass knuckle style” and that’s a perfectly valid opinion, but others have been driven away from this blog and indeed from participating in the Newton Needham Chamber due to that “brass knuckle style”, and that does not serve our business community well, IMHO.”
Did you have a role in this against Greg? Did you reach out to Greg’s employer?
@BobBurke. Rest assured that someone pulled that question because when you view the debates the moderators were using the same questions but skipped that one.
Are you saying that during the debate you didn’t text or email about the question or the fact that Matt Yospin had no idea about the FHA?
@chrispitts @mattyospin. any update here?
@Fig: The Boston Globe has run numerous articles about the husband of mayoral candidate Annissa Essaibi George, who is a Boston developer. Voters can decide for themselves if they think this information is relevant or not in their voting decisions. But they have a right to know that the candidate is the spouse of the Austin Street developer, and is also a Newton real estate developer, and this is not disclosed on her flyers or emails or website as far as I have seen.
Please lower the temperature! We can have this discussion without casting aspersions or making personal attacks. I realize that people here have strong feelings about various issues and candidates, but let’s try to discuss these things civilly.
@emilynorton Councilor Norton, did you or did you not ever reach out to Greg Reibman’s employer?
Sorry Councilor Norton, I didn’t know and shouldn’t have assumed. Your opinion from the Law Department answers one question about legality mentioned on this thread. That has nothing to do with appropriate or not.
Council Norton states that it is fair to know a spouse’s profession. Sure. I don’t know how much we know about the relationship status of the other Councilors either, or how much we really should (beyond addressing conflicts of interest as fairly strict state law requires).
But to make who a person loves the defining criticism of a candidate? Sounds like nothing else sticks. I think people deserve to be considered as individuals, and conflating spouses seems surprisingly 1950’s style outdated. Projecting vaguely alleged behavior onto a spouse (the “bare knuckle” comment) is just one step worse (and less effective).
It’s politics. Sadly pretty tame stuff nowadays. It’s just regrettable that it keeps us from focusing on policy issues or differences of approach, which we know actually does matter.
Councilor Norton:
I certainly acknowledge that the Boston Globe has run dozens of articles on Annissa Essaibi George, including several news articles and opinion articles that go into detail about her husband’s real estate development business. A few points to emphasize: They’ve also written a far greater number of articles about her background, her policies, her goals, her record on the city council, etc. And the context of those articles on her husband relate back to an ethical lapse regarding her opposition to a neighboring project threatening to block the views from her husband’s new development in South Boston. It is a little different in terms of newsworthiness and scope, don’t you think? No one reading the Globe would come away with the impression that Annissa Essaibi George’s most important fact was what her husband did for a living.
You also state that voters “have a right to know that the candidate is the spouse of the Austin Street developer, and is also a Newton real estate developer, and this is not disclosed on her flyers or emails or website as far as I have seen.” I’ve been getting dozens of flyers and emails and I’ve seen all the websites for ALL of the candidates. Funny, but none of them seem to talk about what their spouses do for a living (or even if they are married or seeing someone). Occasionally there is discussion of where they sent their kids to school, and sometimes a cute photo of the family. The only other person I KNOW is married is Mayor Fuller, and that is because someone posted on Facebook criticizing her because her husband founded Monitor Consulting. Again, looking beyond a strong female candidate to her husband. You state that you are sharing this information because voters have a right to know. Is that the standard for all of the candidates? Are you going to demand disclosures on spousal jobs and conflicts from everyone?
This isn’t some great conspiracy to hide the fact that Meryl Kessler’s husband is a developer. He isn’t running for office! She has a lot to say about herself, her background, and what she has done for Newton. And that’s what her flyers/emails/website say.
Just. Like. Every. Other. Candidate. For. Office. In. Newton.
Councilor Norton, while I enjoy these forum back and forth discussions, there are a lot of us commenting at once on this issue and I done my best to make my points already above. I’m confident that neither one of us is going to convince the other, but I appreciate the chance to discuss publicly so that others can make their own decisions. Have a nice night.
Fig – I didn’t see where Councilor Norton said the most important fact about Meryl Kessler is her spouse but you certainly insinuate that when you wrote “No one reading the Globe would come away with the impression that Annissa Essaibi George’s most important fact was what her husband did for a living.”
I can’t speak for the councilor whom I don’t know but I’d be surprised if she felt that way. Maybe your quote didn’t come across quite the way you wanted it to?
@Progressive Newton
Your question to Councilor Norton is so vague as to be practically unanswerable. Greg Reibman was employed by Gatehouse Media for years. Hundreds of Newton residents, including Councilor Norton, sent letters to the editor in favor of issues and candidates for years. Each time constitutes contact with Mr. Reibmsn’s employer. In the same vein, any communication over the years with the former NNCC – Mr Reibman’s current employer, would fall into the category of contact as defined by you. So… along with probably half of Newton and a sizable chunk of Needham, it’s fair to say we’ve ALL contacted Mr. Reibman’s employers.
Jackson Joe: I think I’ve been pretty clear through multiple posts. I’m sure if you read from the top you’ll get my meaning.
Lisa P.: You are usually very direct but you are not your usual self in your last post. Someone from Save Nonantum tried to get Greg fired from his current job as head of the chamber of commerce for his posts on the forum. It just happened a few months ago. Did you forget already? It is similar behavior to what happened to Councilor Norton. I view those action as inappropriate as well (and unethical and unfair, same adjectives apply).
fig – Why the statement that they didn’t judge it as a “most important fact”?
Is that what Councilor Norton said?
In my opinion it may be worth some consideration but not to the level of “most important”
If I had to guess what you are trying to say I would speculate that you don’t think that it’s anyone’s business at all for voters to know who the candidate may be married to or live with.
Jackson Joe, I appreciate your desire to parse words, but no need to guess at all what I’m trying to say. I posted many paragraphs on it above. I’ll let folks judge for themselves.
@Fig
Just went to Kessler’s website. Her top priority listed is “Recovery and Rebuilding.”
Clicking on her Priorities tab, the first bullet listed under that first priority is:
“Revitalizing our village centers so that they continue to be commercial and social hubs.”
Like the Austin St project. So the first thing she mentions as her policy priority happens to be the exact business that her spouse’s business is, and she is well-positioned to personally financially benefit from implementing that policy priority. This was HER choice for top billing on the website.
How exactly is that conflict of interest not relevant?
@Fig,
Thanks for the reminder. That did slip my mind and frankly I never connected that letter to Counselor Norton nor do I think there is any connection. I’m confident that letter was signed by someone on behalf of Save Nonantum PAC – again not Councilor Norton. If memory serves me, Greg Reibman issued an apology and the NNCC (apologies to the chamber that I’m not current on the name) offered funding for one of the feasts (don’t let my surname fool you… I don’t know this feast stuff…). And in hindsight I think that Greg may have spoken with some reflection about his posts and said he was going to try to post more thoughtfully in the future and I think he has. And, I think that’s a laudable goal universally – we sometimes lose ourselves in the moment of a campaign forgetting that it will be over and we will go back to being neighbors.
Fig – I consider you are a voice of reason and I appreciate the calm demeanor and example you set here. But as for the Save Nonantum letter – I forget who heads up that group but I’m 99.99% sure the letter was all him.
Alec:
C’mon.
Go on Susan Albright’s website. First item is affordable housing. Second is village centers.
Vicky Danberg’s website: Housing, long term financial planning, pedestrian safety, and Village Centers.
Voters for a Vibrant Newton: Open Welcoming City, with Vibrant Village Centers.
Andrea Downs: Police, Investing in Roads, Helping our village centers
Brenda Noel: Thoughtful Development and City Planning (including revitalizing our village centers)
Every member of that slate of folks has some version of revitalizing village centers as part of their platform. It is a policy platform of everyone in the Vibrant Newton slate in one form or another. And again, the Austin Project is a finished project. What conflict? What personal financial benefit? The possibility that Dinosaur Capital will do another project in a Newton village center? The last one took 10 YEARS!
It isn’t a conflict of interest if there is not an *actual* conflict of interest. Simply waving your arms and saying it is so doesn’t make it magically appear. Her husband is a developer. She isn’t. There are rules if her husband has a conflict before the council. The law department will weigh in. Every non-profit and governmental agency in MA has a conflict of interest policy.
As you like to say, just stop. She isn’t defined by her husband. She is her own person and candidate.
You could always focus on what makes Pam Wright a great fit for Ward 3…(there is another thread for that too…)
Alec, that would be like saying a City Councilor who owns a home could take no action that increases home values because they benefit financially. A realtor could certainly never run for office.
Councilor Kessler would have to, like any other Councilor, recuse herself from any deliberation that involved her direct interests (such as her husband’s business), nor could she act on any confidential information, nor act to benefit her own interests at the expense of the city or others.
As I said before, this potential for conflict of interest would be clearly known by all, including the public, other Councilors, and Newton’s Legal Department. There are extensive legal requirements that people in government must follow.
This post went up hours ago and doesn’t have a single response. Meanwhile, over on this thread there’s a largely meaningless food fight going on. Frankly, I don’t think any of this has anything to do in any practical way with changing any voter’s minds.
If you are are as passionate about this campaign as you seem to be, make your case, tell us why you believe your candidate is the best choice for Newton voters.
This election probably more than any other in recent memory will come down to ideology and emotion vs logic.
There are (2) sub-parties…
“Progressive at all cost” led by Mayor Fuller and long time Councilors Albright, Crossley, Danberg, etc. Their supporters are passionate, and god help you if you question or challenge their progress.
Then there is the more moderate crew, pushing for more “thoughtful, incremental change” led by Councilors Laredo, Norton, Baker, etc…with challengers like Amy Sangiolo, Kevin Riffe, Lisa Gordon, Rena Getz, Deb Waller, Barry Bergman and others hoping to balance the Council.
Endorsements for either side aligns with the parties. And for a community with such concern for the environment, mailboxes are stuffed with flyers – in duplicate where a home has more than 1 registered voter.
Voters will vote along party lines and will not be, “changing their minds” at the 11th hour – regardless of how they want present theselves in a blog comment.
@Jerry – is this “food fight” meaningless? Don’t think so.
The Progressives are very well funded, highly motivated and well organized. For the moderates to be successful, the apathetic voter needs to be inspired to get off their arse to vote. And if a food fight helps to do that, fire away!
Councilor Norton was speaking about people going after their jobs. So we want to know if she went after Greg’s.
@EmilyNorton @LisaP Councilor Norton did you contact the Chamber during the time of the Save Nonantum incident. Many believe that you played a role in this effort to get Greg fired.
Did you reach out, write a letter, make a phone call or have any other communications to the Chamber or any of Greg’s management in support of Save Nonantum’s claim that could be considered placing Greg’s job in jeopardy, get him in trouble, or bring a negative light to Greg during this time.
Simply….Did you or did you not contact the Chamber? Did you play any role in this?
This is the thread..
https://village14.com/2021/04/16/sore-winners-post-election-campaign/
@mattlai Thank you clearing up that your group are NOTprogressives.
“Councilors Laredo, Norton, Baker, etc…with challengers like Amy Sangiolo, Kevin Riffe, Lisa Gordon, Rena Getz, Deb Waller, Barry Bergman and others hoping to balance the Council. ”
The Moderate group would grind the council to a halt and stop all progress here in Newton – they would become the Susan Collins and Joe Manchin’s of the council.
So if you are looking to turn back the clock on Newton vote for Matt’s team. Go Team Incremental change!
Otherwise if believe Newton is Dynamic and ever changing AND that we have a Climate Crisis OR want to protect and support people of color vote for ….
Councilors at-Large:
Ward One: Alison Leary
Ward Three: Andrea Kelley
Ward Three: Meryl Kessler
Ward Five: Deb Crossley
Ward Five: Andreae Downs
Ward Six: Alicia Bowman
Ward Six: Vicki Danberg
Ward Councilors:
Ward One: Maria Scibelli Greenberg
Ward Three: Jim Cote
Ward Five: Bill Humphrey
Ward Six: Brenda Noel
Go Team Progressives!
Thank you for clearing that up Matt!
Fig & Mike- It’s a losing argument to say that who a candidate is married to or live with has zero bearing on their candidacy.
If you said that it ranks low on importance I could accept your opinion but otherwise you aren’t open minded to what the majority of voters consider.
I am much more disturbed by the silence of Councilor Danberg (and Noel) regarding the false accusation they made about their opponents filing a “lawsuit” against the project at Lexington Cove. This accusation went out to hundreds of people in an email and it is false.
I have voted for Councilor Danberg every time for 20 years but not being able to say mea culpa I made an honest mistake is too much for this former supporter
Amusing that Team Progressives includes Jim Cote.
In any other world, or city, or by any other standard, Matt’s more moderate crew would be considered the progressives.
@Matt Lai – I agree that we seem to have two fairly hardened teams running. Neither team though is ‘hoping to balance the Council’ any more than either the Republicans or Democrats are aiming to balance the Senate. I’m sure both crews would be delighted with a lopsided result in their favor.
@JJ. Of course you are right that pretending that the person you are married to or live with has no bearing on their candidacy. It’s just not credible.
Since we’re so concerned with spouses, why don’t identify the spouses and the associated potential conflicts of all of the candidates running? Or is it only OK for certain female candidates?
@Progressive Newton,
It’s noteworthy that while you try to stir the pot with your bitter fingers and sour grapes, you haven’t addressed Greg Reibman on this very question. And why would you – Fran Yerardi was quite capable of writing the letter to the chamber all on his own so please… instead of hijacking the thread any further with your imaginary plot, I’m sure you must have SOMEthing productive to do with your time (which doesn’t include demanding that Councilor Norton come here to answer YOUR baseless questions. Seriously – you honestly think some new puppet on the blogs is entitled to do that? Rather presumptuous of you.)
JJ: “It’s a losing argument to say that who a candidate is married to or live with has zero bearing on their candidacy.”
It *would* be a losing or simplistic argument to say a candidate’s relations had zero bearing on their candidacy. It’s good I’m not making it. I’m no absolutist.
The discussion in this thread is not about “zero bearing”. The implication by several commenters is that a Councilor Kessler would be compromised by her spousal relationship, even though we have clear and strict conflict of interest laws for public officials. Or that she might use “bare knuckle” tactics with her colleagues, even though she has a long history of constructive collaboration within all of the many groups she has volunteered with. Or even that her desire to “rebuild our villages” – a desire echoed by even her own opponent Pam Wright on her campaign web site – is a tactic to self-enrich.
There is zero evidence I am aware of for any of those conjectures. What there is evidence of is a highly qualified candidate with a uniquely extensive track record of involvement and giving back to Newton in a variety of different ways, working with others constructively and collaboratively for the common good.
This whole aspersion tactic isn’t about spouses. It’s about developers. And to make it personal, it’s about Austin Street. Which, as an aside, I think is a welcome addition to the city.
@Ted. Spouses of male candidates matter too. A certain SC candidate’s wife has been posting amateur political cartoons on FB and as a result many say they won’t vote for her husband on that basis alone.
Mike I’m glad to see that we have some agreement on that premise.
I can’t comment on the level of importance in this race because I don’t have enough information
@Lisa Parlegreco Emily was the one who brought this up regarding someone going after her employment. I think it is fair to ask if she went after Greg’s employment. Many people think Emily went after his job by going to his bosses.
OK How about this?
@GregReibman did you ever try to get Emily Norton fired or disciplined by reaching out to her employer?
@EmilyNorton did you ever try and get Greg Reibman fired or disciplined by reaching out to his employer?
@Progressive Newton
Useless hijacking of a thread. Till you wrote the words here, I’ve not heard a single person utter these specious allegations against Emily and I’m going to suggest that other than perhaps your fertile imagination, there isn’t a scintilla of fact or proof behind this. Move along – nothing to see here.
@Progressive Newton, why so combative and hostile? It isn’t really adding to the dialogue
@Progressive Newton-
Newton is no place for hate.
Hostile and combative behavior is hateful…
Progressive Newton = Sean Roche?????
@Simon – I really don’t think so. I don’t believe Sean would do that. I don’t believe this person still lives in Newton tbh.
Time to lock this thread. The lack of civility and productive discussion in this thread no longer adds anything useful. You can’t blame the V14 moderators for the tone of this thread.
I will answer Progressive Newton’s question.
At the same general time when Save Nonantum’s leadership complained directly to the chamber’s board leadership about me, Councilor Norton had a conversation with the chair of the chamber’s board of directors. It was a private conversation. I will leave it to the two of them to choose to disclose the subject of that conversation, or not.
@Brenda Noel You make the point strongly that the Fair Housing Act prohibits the city council from considering that projects might negatively impact city finances because their property taxes do not cover the costs of their potential impact on schools. I looked through the federal and state code and do not see where it prohibits city councils from considering the impact on schools in approving projects. Please enlighten me.
Bruce don’t hold your breath waiting for that response
Didn’t Northland give about $1.5m towards renovation of Countryside School as part of the special permit process? I think schools must have been discussed at some level
I think I’ll take Bruce C’s suggestion. This thread seems to have lost its way.
Comments closed here