All candidates running for contested seats in the upcoming election were invited to submit a post in support of their candidacy to Village14. This is Meryl Kessler’s
As our 2021 municipal election season draws to a close, I am very grateful for this opportunity to present my closing argument for why Newton voters should elect me to Newton’s City Council.
This is a strange time to be campaigning for public office here in Newton: COVID has restricted face-to-face interactions, our city lacks a local press capable of any deep reporting, and social media has coarsened our civic discourse. Taken together—and added to the fact that our local elections feature dozens of candidates on the ballot—these circumstances have created a perfect storm of low voter information, misinformation, and disinformation.
Nonetheless, my volunteers and I have engaged thousands of Newton residents while knocking on doors. I’ve attended dozens of house parties – outside in backyards and on Zoom—and I’ve spoken to many more residents over coffee, on the phone, and at community events. Listening to my neighbors, I believe now more than ever that people are optimistic and focused on making Newton a more perfect place to live, work, and raise a family.
So, I am delighted to be able to unequivocally and clearly explain what I believe and who I am:
I have lived in this community with my family for 26 years. I emphasize the word “community” because I believe, as one of my core values, that to live in a community means that we have deep and reciprocal obligations to one another. We will not and should not always agree, but it is incumbent upon us all to engage civilly, to use facts and data to support our positions, and to be honest brokers of information.
Both my 30-year career in law, education, and non-profit management and 26 years of volunteer leadership, in Newton and beyond, have deeply influenced by my vision of community.
My professional work, particularly over the last decade, has focused on civic engagement and education:
From 2013 to 2019, as Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts (LWVMA), I focused on voter education and engagement as well as advocacy for modernization of state election laws, tougher gun laws, climate action, and a variety of other legislative priorities. At LWVMA, I had bottom-line responsibility for finance, fundraising, and communications. My experience leading LWVMA underscored for me the importance of consensus-building, clear and frequent communication, and an analytical approach to decision making.
Previously, as Legal Programs Director for Discovering Justice, a nonprofit located at the Moakley Federal Courthouse, I created and ran programs designed not only to teach underserved students in Boston and several Gateway Cities about the justice system, but also to encourage and prepare them to engage in civic life.
Over the years, I have served in a leadership capacity for a range of Newton organizations—Newton Community Pride, Sustainable Materials Management Commission, Newton North School Council, Peirce PTO—and have consistently viewed these activities through the lens of building a stronger, more vibrant community. I am especially proud of programs that I helped create here in Newton that were designed to build and strengthen community (for example, the Halloween Window Painting Contest, now in its 22nd year, and last summer’s Newton Out Doors public art initiative, that activated our village centers) and address issues of equity (Newton North High School’s Global Education Leadership Fund).
How does my focus on community translate into specific campaign priorities?
- Winston Churchill allegedly said: “You should never waste a good crisis.” As we begin to emerge from the crisis of the pandemic, we have a chance to address longstanding challenges for our community and come out the other side stronger, more equitable, and more resilient. I am running for office because I believe the time is right to grab this opportunity to move forward on a variety of issues, including:
-
- Recovery and revitalization of our village centers: To enable our village centers to reach their full potential as commercial, residential, cultural, and civic hubs, the Council should review/update our zoning, permitting, licensing, and parking policies.
- Wide-ranging infrastructure improvements: The Council should prioritize overdue upgrades to roads, schools, municipal buildings, and parks to maintain our quality of life, to ensure that our municipal buildings are less reliant on fossil fuels, and to create a Newton that is walkable, bike-able, and accessible for all.
- Supporting seniors and vulnerable residents: The Council must ensure that we have sufficient resources to fund vital services for our growing senior population, take steps to increase our stock of affordable housing so that people of diverse backgrounds and income levels can live here, and implement policies to support our most vulnerable residents
…And do all of this with an eye toward meeting our climate action goals!
As we rebuild and revitalize after this difficult and disruptive pandemic, it’s important that we have leaders who can bring a range of diverse voices and perspectives into the conversation, who value communication with everyone in the community, who look for shared interests and common ground, and who can articulate a positive vision for moving us forward.
I promise that, if elected, I will work hard, represent your voice, and build on my track record of community service aimed at bringing us together. I am not beholden to anyone or any single idea. And I will strive to listen to and represent everyone in this incredible city.
I’m proud to have been endorsed by 22 current and former elected officials and over 200 community leaders. I look forward to being a fresh and positive voice on the Newton City Council, and I hope I can earn your vote on November 2.
@Meryl
Will you commit that your husband will not pursue development in Newton while you serve on the Council? Encouraging more development when your husband and you benefit from the resulting changes to our zoning is not OK.
Plenty of officials put assets in trusts to ensure they are not swayed by undue conflicts, or recuse themselves from votes where there is a conflict of interest, which in your case would be all development-related topics.
Will you commit to be as ethical as possible by avoiding conflicts of interest, by recusing yourself or your husband commuting to not developing property in Newton while in office?
I’m really excited to have the opportunity to vote for Meryl.
She is adept at knowing the intricacies of each issue facing the city, and she always keep an eye out for the community.
Her years of related experience will make her an exceptional Councilor, and I will be sure to pass this message along to friends and neighbors who plan to vote.
I think Meryl is an exceptional candidate for city councilor, and I plan on voting for her. I honestly didn’t realize how many Newton based activities she has been a part of over the past two decades until I read her website recently, and I’ve been surprised how many people I trust have shared with me how much they trust and like her over the past few weeks as the election has gotten closer. Anyone that I know that has worked with her on Newton based activities has sung her praises. And she has a very impressive resume of community engagement, as described in her above post.
I realize there are 3 strong candidates for two seats, and that it is always hard to join the city council by taking on an incumbent, but I really think she’d be an excellent addition.
Development / Rezoning is a hot topic at the moment.
It’s terrible timing to have a developers wife on the city council right now.
Alec,
Candidate Kessler doesn’t have to pledge to anything. There is a very clear conflict of interest law that covers exactly the situation you are concerned about:
MGL Part IV, Title I, Chapter 268A, Section 19:
> (a) Except as permitted by paragraph (b), a municipal employee who participates as such an employee in a particular matter in which to his knowledge he, his immediate family or partner, a business organization in which he is serving as officer, director, trustee, partner or employee, or any person or organization with whom he is negotiating or has any arrangement concerning prospective employment, has a financial interest, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years, or in a jail or house of correction for not more than 2 1/2 years, or both.
> (b) It shall not be a violation of this section (1) if the municipal employee first advises the official responsible for appointment to his position of the nature and circumstances of the particular matter and makes full disclosure of such financial interest, and receives in advance a written determination made by that official that the interest is not so substantial as to be deemed likely to affect the integrity of the services which the municipality may expect from the employee, or (2) if, in the case of an elected municipal official making demand bank deposits of municipal funds, said official first files, with the clerk of the city or town, a statement making full disclosure of such financial interest, or (3) if the particular matter involves a determination of general policy and the interest of the municipal employee or members of his immediate family is shared with a substantial segment of the population of the municipality.
And yes, City Councilors are considered municipal employees under the conflict of interest law.
That’s the law, it’s well known, Meryl Kessler’s potential for conflict of interest is well known, the city’s legal department will make sure it is enforced (note they don’t work for City Council), and I’m sure you’ll weigh in if they don’t.
Simon French: Well, happily for us she is not just a “developer’s wife”. She’s Meryl Kessler, she’s got a name, a career and a set of accomplishments separate and distinct from her husband.
Also, I’m pretty sure there have been some real estate brokers and owners on the city council before. And many of the city councilor own very large and expensive homes in Newton, all of which will be impacted by zoning issues in some way or form.
And happily, as Mike Halle mentions, I’m sure you’ll be all over the issue if she even remotely violates the ethical standard. I’ll pay attention too, I’d be upset if the rules weren’t followed.
@Mike Halle
You made the point before. That law doesn’t cover conflicts on interests fully. There are laws at the federal level too, and conflicts are rife. Citing a law doesn’t make it a good one. Ethics and law are two different things.
Its up to our electorate if we want to hold our government to a higher standard. Changing zoning that encourages more development does not violate the statutes you cite, but is a clear conflict of interest when it creates future business opportunities for her husband. Not looking to debate it, that is a factual statement. Each voter can decide for themselves if they are OK with that type of conflict of interest, and Meryl is welcome to raise the ethical standard by the actions suggested above.
Alec, by that standard no business person nor Realtor, nor anyone with one in their immediate family would effectively be allowed to hold office and maintain their livelihood. That would rule out huge swaths of highly qualified potential officeholders.
The Massachusetts conflict of interest law draws a strict but practical standard on what constitutes conflict of interest with the threat of fine and imprisonment. It clearly makes illegal things like participating (e.g., deliberating) on issues where the employee or someone in their immediate family has a financial interest.
And yes, voters get to decide. This election, next election, raising complaints to the Council itself, the law department, or the Attorney General’s Office. Seem like there are a lot of checks in the system.
Mike, I don’t want to defend Alec’s position on this candidate but there are numerous examples of the public good not being served because of “indirect” conflict of interest. It’s a fairly high bar to reach,
A good example of subtle conflict of interest is Cynthia Stone Creem who has thwarted many legal reform bills in her position as chairwoman and majority leader that have benefitted her family law firm. She wouldn’t even allow them to be voted on (ALA Mitch McConnell)
@Mike & @fig I was surprised to see Meryl’s involvement in a soon to be complete single family property flip very briefly mentioned in a now closed V14 post. It raises a few questions and concerns for me.
According to the MA Secretary of State, Meryl and her spouse formed a limited liability corporation named Sixty Temple LLC on Sept. 10, 2020. In Oct. 2020, the LLC, which identified Meryl Kessler as a corporate manager, purchased a 3,434 sq ft home at 60 Temple for $1,450,000, which was below assessed value.
The 8,100 sq ft single family home being build on that site went on the market for $4,995,000 and it’s now under agreement.
(LINK: https://www.coldwellbankerhomes.com/ma/newton/60-temple-st/pid_39771765/ )
Why did a candidate telling voters that, “increasing affordable housing in Newton requires a multi-pronged approach” (Source: Engine 6) refrain from doing something with this project.
Our current zoning allows single family home owners to seek a permit for accessory apartments. Such a unit could be used to house an elderly relative looking to downsize OR possibly a single parent looking to rent close to an elementary school and transit.
60 Temple certainly would fit the bill:
– The half acre lot is three tenths of a mile from both the WN commuter rail station and Pierce Elementary School.
– The $3.5 mill increase between acquisition price and final listing price suggests ample margin to create more housing.
– This is a very attractive area of Newton. The Coldwell Banker listing states, “Welcome to Hill Top! Modern luxury design for today’s lifestyle atop WNH.
For the record, I think developers should make a profit. And, the increase in property taxes for this parcel will benefit Newton which has more than $1Billion in debt and unfunded liabilities.
However, this project is different. The candidate is personally involved as the developer (prior experience she fails to disclose on her campaign website) and she chose not to walk the walk and set an example to other developers.
For those inclined to question whether a special permit would have been granted, I would note the accessory apartment section of our Zoning code has broad support on the current City Council and among both Mayoral candidates. Personally, I feel there’s an opportunity to help SFH developers see that the ADU ordinance doesn’t have to negatively impact their efforts to quickly maximize profits.
Two final questions the 60 Temple project raise for me are:
1) Is this a real-world example of policy statements we’re hearing from Mayor Fuller and others that increased housing density will happen in and around village centers, but there is a need to preserve the unique character of certain areas? Specifically, does Meryl feel areas north of the Pike and on the Wester edges of Newton should continue to see high-density development while more affluent, less diverse neighborhoods many also close to transit receive a lighter touch to maintain their suburban, luxury feel?
2) Why aren’t Sean Roche, Engine 6 and Voters for Vibrant Newton – two organizations who champion housing density who endorsed Meryl – concerned by this missed opportunity to create more affordable housing in Newton?
Rich,
I have been entirely consistent. 1. Make it legal to build multi-family housing on every lot in Newton. 2. Limit the size of new units in multi-family buildings to no more than 1,500 s.f. (at the most, less in some areas/situation). 3. Limit the size of additions to or replacements of single-family homes. We do not need any more 3,500+ s.f. in Newton. We have plenty.
If we did those three things, it would not be possible to turn 60 Temple into an 8,100 s.f. home. It would be possible to create 4-6 1,000 to 1,500 s.f. homes. Convert the existing home to two homes and add 2-4 homes elsewhere on the lot, attached to the existing home or otherwise.
If the fact that 60 Temple St. is an 8.100 s.f. home and not multi-family housing bothers you — and it should, focus on the policies, not the property owner. Pam Wright has made it abundantly clear that she adamantly opposes multi-family housing in our current Single Residence districts.
When I’m deciding whom to vote for, I consider what unique skill set/abilities/talents a candidate brings to the position. Meryl’s involvement in the LWV at the state level tells me that she understands the importance of allowing all voices to be heard on an equal, unbiased platform.
I’m also impressed with her clear artistic sense and her involvement in the arts community in Newton. In the nest few years, Newton will have a number of new building projects in the works. We need councilors with expertise in a variety of areas to ensure that our new buildings are architecturally appropriate for their use, environmentally sustainable, and aesthetically pleasing. I think Meryl has an eye for the “aesthetically pleasing” that I admire. If we want a beautiful city, we need to build beautiful buildings.
My final reason for voting for Meryl may seem mundane, but I don’t think so in these divisive times: Meryl is unfailingly generous of spirit, kind, and polite to all.
These were my reasons for casting my vote for Meryl.
Rich,
Great investigation (shame we don’t have investigator reporters in Newton)
This is your typical “do as I say, not as I do”
In this case, the candidate was actively involved in development of the property
To be clear, almost no one agrees with Sean on this issue and no candidate should be judged by his position. Sean is not running for office.
Jane – Does that mean we shouldn’t be asking candidates to comment on a “Sean Roche endorsement”?
No, it means that Sean’s endorsement does not define a candidate. No one’s endorsement defines a candidate. Sean’s position on this issue is not part of mainstream thinking about zoning in the city. However, that doesn’t mean he should be denied the right to endorse candidates. It may be that on other issues (infrastructure, capital projects, etc), he and Meryl share common ground.
If we ask Meryl to go through her entire list of endorsements, then every other candidate should be asked to do the same.
For instance, I could ask candidates on this blog if they accepted the Save Nonantum endorsement. It would be highly presumptuous of me to assume that they would respond.
Jane,
Save Nonantum is a registered political action committee that can and does spend contributor donations to support candidates. I post on a blog.
The better analogy is with campaign donations. Candidates get criticized all the time for accepting donations from certain categories of donors. And, candidates are expected to review donations and return them to donors who are off-limits. Candidates should be expected to understand who their PAC endorsers are just as much as they are expected to understand who their donors are and decline endorsements from groups, such as Save Nonantum, who spread unsubstantiated allegations.
As far as my zoning positions being mainstream, read my post on Amy’s housing event. Almost half of her presumably friendly audience thinks we need multi-family housing within a 1/4-mile of transit. 60 Temple St. is either within a quarter-mile of the West Newton commuter rail station or not much farther from it. I think what people want is exactly what I’m proposing, maybe applied to less of Newton.
Rich, good research. I would say that not adding an accessory dwelling unit (which must be attached without a special permit) to a new house says more about the ADU ordinance than it does about the development or the developer.
It would seem to be a very high risk to develop an attached unit destined for the open market (i.e., not custom-designed for a specific buyer), especially one of high fit and finish like the rest of the property, hoping that’s what the buyer wants.
Given the tepid uptake of ADUs in Newton, such examples may be more proof that ADUs, or at least Newton’s version just aren’t that great a mechanism for increasing density. They definitely have their place, perhaps as what used to be called “mother and law” apartments or “kid over the garage” units, or for people whose need for a big house have changed over time.
But they are a significant hassle for homeowners to have built themselves. At the same time, they are an expense and risk for developers building new properties. They also may actually drive up the cost of housing if they risk being unused. It’s like selling more minivans in the hopes that more people will take up carpooling.
The ADU ordinance is fine in and of itself. It provides people more options on their own property. Honestly, though, I see them as more of a tool for the existing homeowner (space for family, supplemental income) than for the community. Things might be a little different if they could be detached, but even then. I love my extended family, but I don’t think any of us are interested in building a new unit into our existing house so they can live with us.
Several candidates for City Council mention supporting ADUs as a primary and palatable way to support increase density. I would throw the question back at them to say how much difference it could possibly make.
I also note that Candidate Kessler had no part in the ADU ordinance that I know of.
Friendly amendment to what Mike wrote. As I understand it, to get a permit for an ADU, either the main house or the ADU have to be owner-occupied at the time the ADU is built (or carved out of the existing space). So, developers cannot add an ADU and then resell the property.
@Mike Halle
Not sure if you’re not thinking clearly or being extreme on purpose, but what you said is not true.
Someone can recuse them fully from all development issues, those are still a minority of the issues before the Council and can still be an effective representative. OR- if one prefers not to recuse, commit to not developing in NEWTON during time of service. Not stop your livelihood, just the small sliver of our metro area that’s Newton for a period of time.
The presumption that we’d be comfortable with the spouse of the CEO of Pfizer or GlaxoSmithKline running the FDA, or spouse of the CEO of Facebook or Youtube running the FCC is silly. It would never happen. That’s not even the standard here, I’m not suggesting to not run, just recuse or avoid Newton for development during the term. It’s not unreasonable by any means.
It’s Ok that you have different ethical standards- each voter chooses what’s best for them. If Meryl is seeking the votes of those us with higher standards, she’ll offer recusal or not developing in Newton during her term. If she is fine with the appearance and potential reality of financially benefiting from public service, that’s her personal and political decision.
Looks, Meryl seems great. Truly. But we’ve accepted too low an ethical bar for too long. My question to Meryl isn’t an unreasonable standard at all.
All Newton employees have to go through a conflict of interest process periodically (I forget how often, but I’ve done it many times). IMO, the City of Newton takes this issue very seriously and I’ve observed councilors recuse themselves from votes on a number of occasions.
Meryl,
First, thank you for running. Like everyone in this election, it’s hard to put yourself out there.
You note the idea that we should never let a good crisis go to waste. During the pandemic, many communities experimented with different traffic patterns and protected bike lanes. Boston, notably, put in quite a large number. Newton did not do anything remotely like this, even as (early in the pandemic) many people purchased bicycles.
In one instance, on Washington Street, the city put in painted bike lanes only to pull them out at the insistence of neighboring businesses who claimed that the loss of parking would impact their employees. Is there something different the city could have done in that instance to both take advantage of the crisis and increase alternative transportation? Should the city have stood its ground and kept the lanes, forcing the businesses to adjust? Or did it do the right thing by pulling back? Should Washington St. have been reduced to a single lane in that situation? Or was it the wrong time to try the “road diet” suggested in the Washington St. vision plan?
@Chuck: just to clarify, businesses didn’t object to the bike lanes, they objected to the lack of advance notice, not having a chance to provide input and the inability to explore alternatives for employees and customers before it happened.
Fire away Meryl! You’re in safe hands
here. Chuck Tanowitz, I mean
VVN have got your back.
Having had a front row seat to the Washington Street bike lane, the story is just too complicated to pigeonhole. There’s the emergency paving project. The rush to get paint down. The pandemic creating an opportunity with less traffic and parking demand. The fact that a lane in only one direction was possible without pulling a lane of travel, which would have required a much longer public process. The upcoming plans for a trial of a real plan that’s safer for everybody. The fact that removing parking on the pike side wasn’t part of the trial. The fact that some businesses like the idea of a fully designed safer Washington Street, but didn’t like the half-step that removed parking they believed they needed. The temporary lane would have served Newton North, but school turned out to start remotely. Finally, there was some addition miscommunication between advocates and the city and DPW that I don’t fully understand.
Basically, the urgency of the paving and the fluid nature of the pandemic prevented a start and stop, partially useful bike project from happening. Ultimately, this wasn’t a project to stand on for principle’s sake.
The real question is how can we create a better, safer Washington Street for the future.
Safety is a major issue here. Washington Street is a major corridor for NNHS students walking and biking to school. They bike on the broken sidewalk because that’s the only place that seems safe for them. Two weeks ago, a Newton North student biking to school on the sidewalk was hit by a motor vehicle at Brookside and Washington St, sending him to the hospital by ambulance with a concussion.
We need ward councilor leadership to build consensus around good and safe solutions that can get built. Representatives who can get all the issues on the table and build mutual trust between different groups. We can all come up with reasons not to do things, but real leaders stuff done when it needs to get done.
When the Washington Street bike lane issue was being discussed, I had an email exchange with Councilor Kelley, who I know has lots of connections in the city and neighborhood. I did not hear about any action by Councilors Malakie or Wright. Maybe there was something happening behind the scenes, but this was an issue that needed visibility and community dialog, if not for the quick fix then for a long term plan.
Candidate Kessler, the city plans to design and trial a lane reduction on Washington Street in West Newton to improve safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers. Multiple traffic studies, including one done at the state level, say the road is overbuilt for traffic, but people in the community are skeptical.
Will you work with the West Newton residential and business community, safety advocates, city staff, and representatives from NPS to build consensus toward a successful Washington Street traffic trial?
I haven’t checked lately, but we had to really raise a ruckus to get the streetlight at the corner of Brookside and Washington fixed. I haven’t looked lately, but there were 3 or 4 going towards west Newton that were still out at that time. With the coming darker skies getting the lights fixed would be a nice safety feature ( sarcasm intended). If you can’t keep the lights on, what can you do?
While I’m at it, the new LED street lights may be more efficient, but for a “urbanizing” area where more people may be walking, they’re pretty bad. They’re very bright at the top when you look at them, ( glaring, in fact, when in a car) but the cone beam they put out is dim and we carry a flashlight when we walk the dog. It’s pitch black once you walk out of that narrow cone, between each light.
Rick Frank, yes, Seems we spend a lot of time arguing about what shouldn’t be done on Washington St that we cede it either to neglect or to a developer’s vision rather than our own. I would love this area to get more proactive attention from our ward councilors who are often the people who see and hear about these issues.
And yes, the LED.lighting in Newton is poor, especially for pedestrians. Newton chose to replace just the bulbs, not the fixtures. I did a study of the lighting around the north side of town about five years ago. Now-Councilor Downs helped it get attention within the city. Now the city has lighting standards and they have been used in West Newton and Newtonville. Those squares are much more pedestrian friendly.
It’s an indication that things can change in Newton, and that the right Councilors in the right positions with the right priorities can make a real difference.
I feel Meryl Kessler has the right mix of skills and experience to make a uniquely positive contribution to City Council.
In particular, her experience with Newton Community Pride is a huge opportunity to encourage new partnerships that could bring art, culture, and other amenities to our squares, villages, and neighborhoods. After the last year or so, we need special things, available to all, to lift our common spirits and stitch us together again. Literally Newton Community Pride. That’s part of Candidate Kessler’s passion, and we need far more of it.