Polls open at 7 a.m. Tuesday. Use this thread to make one last pitch for your perspective on the three overrides ballot question (see what the ballot looks like here). Or if you’re still undecided and have a question, ask here. Odds are good that someone will answer.
Not sure where you vote? Look here.
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHhimTlvWTI]
We Elect a Mayor for a Reason
In 2010, we inaugurated a new mayor in Newton, Setti Warren. This was after a lively campaign that had 5 challengers, including a leader of the current anti-override group, Bill Heck.
Then, as now, Bill and his group were quite adamant on the need to cut in ABSOLUTE terms the size of Newton government. Voters resoundingly rejected that approach to Newton governance.
Instead, citizens opted for a candidate, Setti Warren, who promised a much more open approach to government and a commitment to aggressively tackle our fiscal woes, affectionately known as a “structural deficit.”
Over 3 years now, his administration has largely done that. There’s still more to be done, as they acknowledge. But they’ve made solid progress nonetheless.
We hoped Setti would restore trust in Newton’s government, and in my view he has.
And trust in him is what we need to be demonstrating now. He’s been delivering on his campaign promises, and he is now asking that we rely upon that track record by trusting that his administration’s analysis of our fiscal condition requires us to seek additional funds over and above Proposition 2 ½ to fund pent up infrastructure needs, and a rapidly growing schools’ population.
There are folks who over the past several months have been doing back-of-the envelope calculations of all manner of “solutions” to avoid this override. While this administration has for 3 years now been analyzing anything and everything in painstaking detail. That kind of scrutiny enables our leaders to find good solutions, and at times discern when other ideas won’t pan out, even though they might like them to.
From a person who was quite cynical of the prior administration, I have come to conclude, via up close observation, that the Warren administration has earned my/our trust, and it now deserves our support to advance the task of solidifying Newton’s overall well-being as a city.
Let the mayor execute on his plan. If he doesn’t, that’s what municipal elections are for.
Dan
(1) Setti was in a pool of 5 candidates in the primary. He didn’t win there, even though it was a weak group. Bill Heck was the most sane, but Newton liberals just don’t believe in self-control.
(2) Setti barely won the final election against Ruth Balser, in my opinion a pretty weak mayoral candidate, but with a strong following in the city she represents in the legislature.
(3) Setti, after expressing his great desire to help Newton overcome its problems, quickly abandoned Newton and jumped on a Senatorial bandwagon, the one he really was hoping for, claiming that he was the hero who was going to rescue the state Democrats from Scott Brown. They quickly showed him otherwise.
(4) As a result of his two-faced actions in the Senatorial race, and his continued activity at the national level in an attempt to make himself important, I simply don’t trust him. He’s proven to be a phony.
(5) Setti is right that Newton needs to take care of a lot of problems, but he is not helping sufficiently. His holding the “trajectory”, as Bill Brandel so proudly asserts, to 2 1/2 % is a non-starter.
(6) I may vote for the debt exclusion overrides, because the schools are in dire need, Setti can’t seem to come up with another way to deal with it, the state will contribute and will monitor them to be sure they’re done responsibly, and they won’t cost the average Newton home-owner a lot of money.
(7) I will not vote for the general override that is just more money in the coffers, to be spent in the end however the mayor wants, regardless of what he says it’s for. I don’t trust him, and I’d like him to look for real savings and not drain the taxpayers even more. There’ll be more overrides in the future. Newton is not out of the water yet, but they need to be more like the debt exclusion overrides for capital projects. Setti should use some methods of economization to live within the normal operating budget and its annual 2 1/2% increase.
While I disagree with you, Barry, I respect your opinion.
Two things to ponder, though, given your leaning toward support of the DEs for Angier and Cabot. One is that Zarvas is in the same boat as those two schools, in terms of being a part of the infrastructure solution. That is inside the operating override though, as is the new fire station. Secondly, adding capacity to these schools, which is part of the purpose for these, contains an obvious corollary, namely the need for extra teachers, and those get funded via the operating override.
To me, voting for the DEs and not the operating override is a non-sequitor.
Dan,
“voting for the DEs and not the operating override is a “non sequitur”???
I’ll say this again. The debt exclusion overrides are seemingly necessary for those two schools. They have a finite, but lengthy lifetime. They will be supplemented with state funds. They will be monitored for responsible spending by the state, which was floored by the irresponsibility of NNHS. They won’t cost the taxpayers a lot of money.
You can’t say any of that about the general override.
Dan, this debate needs to be restricted to one blog.
I CAN say it about the general override – it goes hand in hand with the DEs. It contains a necessary ingredient to expand school capacity. Extra classrooms without extra teachers doesn’t make sense.
And it contains a third critical infrastructure piece for the schools’ growth, namely Zervas.
I think the “F” in Fahey stands for Flip-Flopping Fraud.
I find it amusing that you were impressed with the fiscal whitewash that Setti served up. Last I checked, Newton’s annual spending is $48M higher in 2013 versus 2008.
Last I checked, you, Seideman and Norton made pension/OPEB costs a major issue in 2008, yet even though the liabilities have grown significantly since then and spending on pensions/OPEB has grown significantly since then I hear nary a word from you or your comrades.
WRT “This was after a lively campaign that had 5 challengers, including a leader of the current anti-override group, Bill Heck.
Then, as now, Bill and his group were quite adamant on the need to cut in ABSOLUTE terms the size of Newton government.”
Really? I’ve been arguing that the next union contract should either have a pay freeze of 18 months followed by 2.5%/year total compensation growth (including pension/OPEB contributions) for the remainder of the contract or total compensation growth of 1%/year plus new growth for the three year contract. I’m trying to figure out where my people have been arguing for cutting Newton government, especially because I’ve been heavily involved in setting the message to defeat Setti’s three extravagantly expensive property tax hikes.
“Voters resoundingly rejected that approach to Newton governance.”
With the exception of Bill Heck, the 2009 Mayoral race was basically vote for your favorite Democrat.
“and a rapidly growing schools’ population.” When I was a freshman at NNHS in 1995, Newton Public Schools spent $65.8M and had a student body of 10,680.
In 2013, Newton Public Schools spent $178.8M and had a student body of 12,440.
Why did spending nearly triple for only 16% more students?
“While this administration has for 3 years now been analyzing anything and everything in painstaking detail.” When Setti Warren ran for mayor in 2009, he promised to do more with less. Only problem is revenue is at an all-time high and spending is also at an all-time high and the mayor wants more money.
“From a person who was quite cynical of the prior administration, I have come to conclude, via up close observation, that the Warren administration has earned my/our trust, and it now deserves our support to advance the task of solidifying Newton’s overall well-being as a city.”
Is that what you are going to be saying in five to six years when your hero asks for another package of overrides?
http://newton.patch.com/articles/newton-aldermen-approve-override-ballot-question-special-election
Bill Heck is a good and decent man, which is more than I can say for a flip-flopping mealy mouthed old fraud like you.
For the over 30 crowd, WRT = With Regard To…
The only reason the trailers park education centers (modulars) and Zervas school are on the General Tax override is because Newton is already S T R E T C H I N G it with the MSBA and there is no way we would get state funding for 3 schools (even if the State Treasurer is a Newton resident)!
emphasis mine
So much for sticking to the issues. There, my friends, you have the spokesperson for “Moving Newton Forward” showing his true colors.
Tricia, if anything, it is Fahey the flip-flopper who has shown his true colors.
…and so much for REASONABLE MINDS CAN DISAGREE.
I was about to comment that the discourse has been so much more pleasant this time around. But how much lower can one go than lobbing names at Dan Fahey?
Not a good campaign strategy.
I posted this on another blog, and I’ll post it here, since Dan has started the practice of duplication.
————————————–
I want to say one different thing. The issue of the overrides is serious business. Setti has proven to be untrustworthy, and I wouldn’t give him the general override if I were the voters of Newton.
Some of the way Joshua has expressed himself is crude and insensitive. I don’t like it. He needs to polish himself up a bit if he wants to do this kind of political organization. But, please, voters, don’t make this a referendum on him, just as the override before should not have been a referendum on David Cohen. Vote NO on the general override and give a lot of thought to what the debt exclusion overrides mean to you.
What will future sociologists interpret how in the early 2000’s Newton’s collective tact police (along with the ‘PC police’) on Newton blogs and various listervs/Google Groups spent as much tine (or more) engaged in discussing (or scolding) the intricacies and method of communication than the subject at hand.
Back in ’08, Rob Gifford and I faced off against each other [along with other co-chairs] but we never had a cross word to say about the others personally, and thus have had a solid professional relationship since then, so much so that we are honorary chairs of this pro-override committee.
I was middle-of-the-road back then [have always been an independent], and I am now. To me circumstances have changed significantly since ’08, helping explain my differing stance.
Attacking me personally won’t change my opinion, nor my commitment to this particular override, but I do hope it has some impact on how folks view the MNF folks.
Gail, I’ve come out against three extravagantly expensive tax-overrides pushed forth by the city establishment. It really doesn’t matter what I say, you’ll call it lobbing names anyway.
This seems like the right time to politely ask that everybody knock it off. Tempers always flair at this point before an election. Let’s keep to the issues and leave the discussion of personalities to our next bloggers party.
@Barry
Hear, hear!
Additionally, another 2008 Newton for Fiscal Responsibility participant (who did not drink the tax override ‘kool aid’), Bill Hobbib, has also maintained his position on property tax increase requests in our fair city. See his thoughts on today’s Newton Patch.
Fahey, if the arguments made the pro-override side with your tutelage is any indication of the value you bring to the table, then my group and I would say that your defection is a case of addition by subtraction.
Actually, it does matter what you say when you are the spokesperson for a particular group. And you did call someone (several) names – there’s nothing else to call it. This has nothing to do with being “PC” – these ad hominem attacks do not further your arguments in any way.
Joshua, you are misinformed about your opposition. Rob Gifford and I are honorary co-chairs. The ones doing the REAL work are Marcia Tabenken and Emily Prenner, the actual co-chairs.
An interesting exercise while considering the Override:
Pick a community you’d move to and compare those tax rates with Newton’s.
Well said, Tricia. In fact, I was at the Ward 8 community meeting yesterday and it was nice to have the MNF co-chair Suzanne there, asking questions, challenging points, and doing it in a constructive, respectful manner.
I’m going to shut down comments on this thread for a couple hours. Everybody go grab some lunch, maybe take a yoga class and come back this afternoon.
Back and open for business.
Anybody have an opinion about the three ballot questions which will go before Newton voters on Tuesday?
In the last 24 hours I have received 3 calls from the main phone number of Building Newton’s Future. The first one was a robo call from Setti Warren last night at 6:30 pm. I guess the dinner hour is not to be respected anymore. The second one at 1:10 pm disconnected when I picked up.
The third one at 1:30 pm today was the most disconcerting. It was a live call from a child reminding me to vote tomorrow. While the conversation was quite professional (more so than what is happening on this blog), today is a school day. Why was this youngster not in school at 1:30 in the afternoon? Is NPS offering student internships now? If our students are not in school at 1:30 in the afternoon, why do we need new school buildings?
@Patrick: When you say child, how old do you mean? Did you ask why he/she wasn’t in class? Anyone else get one of these?
Yes, “Yes” votes will keep our momentum up in moving the city in the right direction.
Greg, I did not ask her age. It was a brief call; she hung up before I could get over my surprise at her apparent youth. I would guess somewhere between 5th and 7th grade (10 – 12 y/o). She was on a mission to convey her message (it could have been a script), and move along to the next call. She was very polite. I have no issue with the caller other than her apparent age and time of day.
Maybe someone from BNF can clarify since the call was from their telephone.
Dan, WRT “Joshua, you are misinformed about your opposition. Rob Gifford and I are honorary co-chairs. The ones doing the REAL work are Marcia Tabenken and Emily Prenner, the actual co-chairs.”
I saw the guests columns and letters to the editor from you, Tabenken, Prenner and Gifford versus what my group and I have sent.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1292887309/Dan-Fahey-and-Rob-Gifford-Activists-unite-on-override#axzz2N4WhMkbG
Our side has made a more informative case. We hope that people will be impressed that few stood against many, that fiscal responsibility stood against fiscal mismanagement, that substance stood against style and that even the humblest citizen can poke holes in the well-crafted arguments crafted by the proudest officeholders.
Regards of how this turns out, Newton will always have a grassroots group of citizens devoted to fiscal responsibility. Furthermore, we don’t see anyone from our group getting co-opted into supporting extraordinarily extravagant property tax hikes in the future.
If these three overrides pass, I recommend you have a sit-down with Setti & Company and inform him that he better make every dollar count because we won’t be fooled again by the smoke and mirrors tactics that your group utilized this time around.
Re: Patrick comments, I can assure you no children were making phone calls.
I think there is much more to be done to bring our fiscal house in order. But nothing is ever perfect, at least nothing run by actual humans, and I believe on balance that the needs are real and that the plan to achieve them is solid. That’s why I’m voting yes. And I really don’t care if Josh calls me names over it. Unless he is SUPER creative, I’m sure I’ve been called worse.
Marcia, thank you for your reply. I do not know you so I will take you at your word. I am not looking to create false information. It appears I am the only one who experienced this.
I will say that in addition to raising 3 children I coached youth sports for 23 years. The kids were K – 12 with a majority in the 9 -12 y/o age range. I say this so you will know I have had lots of opportunity to hear children’s voices. The voice I heard sounded like that of a child. Some adult must be living a good, healthy life.
Or a kid home sick, parent is calling, is bored and asks to take a turn. Or one of those unfortunate adults who have a kid’s voice (it happens).
I’m one of the co-chairs of Building Newton’s Future. It was a women with a very childlike voice.
Greg, I’m voting Yes on all three ballot questions. This is not an overly ambitious override and many of us would love for it to do more. But to paraphrase Mike Zilles, this is a simple transaction and you get what you pay for.
In our case we’ll get three decrepit schools, two fire houses, and the fire HQ modernized and expanded. We’ll get modulars and increased staffing to cover large school enrollment growth, and a budget increase to accelerate the rate of street and sidewalk repair and to hire additional police officers. This override will allow Newton to make smart, modest investments that will positively impact the lives of all Newton residents.
Coupled with the Mayor’s achievements around taming the structural deficit, zero-basing our budget to reduce City Hall operating expenses, and building a 20 year capital plan, this override is an important piece of Newton’s improvement puzzle.
@Emily: Why would someone call you names?
Steve asked, “Emily, why would someone call you names?”
Because, she, like you and me and quite a number of other folks who voted against the last override, have become flip-floppers.
Emily, I’m not pleased that you flipped however I can abide that you and Seideman have had a lower profile in this round in comparison to Fahey.
WRT “I think there is much more to be done to bring our fiscal house in order.”
That’s why I’m voting NO-NO-NO, that way I can use that to remind Setti Hall & Company that their words mean things and that I’m holding them to their words.
Besides, I compared your Newton TAB editorial to mine and mine was more informative than yours anyway. It’s not like you have anything to be ashamed of though.
Our opposition to the three overrides is based on the fact that the city underfunded maintenance and improvements on its capital assets while providing ample pay raises and benefit packages to its workers. The overwhelming majority of Newton’s FTEs have begun working for Newton since before 2010 (the time we are supposed to put in the past). Three out of the eight School Committee members (including the Chairwoman) and 16 of the 23 Aldermen (including the President, Vice President and President Emeritus) are David Cohen era holdovers (the Mayor whose record of mismanagement we are supposed to forget). So if anything, it appears that the contractors that we hired that didn’t do the job are still here, drawing a paycheck that is paid for by our taxes.
Not flip floppers, Dan. Each issue we face in the city requires a review of the facts that we then reflect, and come up with an opinion. But thank goodness we’re not the House of Representatives where people dig their heels into one position on every issue.
Like Emily, I’ve had people angry at me for a position or two I’ve taken. We get over it and life goes on.
“that we reflect on…”
Fahey, at least Seideman and Norton have had the common courtesy of having a lower profile this time around. I find it amusing that even though annual spending has increased by $48M since the 2008 override and $25M since Setti Warren became mayor, you’ve been more vocal in favor of the three overrides than you were against David Cohen’s overrides.
I find it amusing that you’re carrying water for the tax hikers even though Setti Warren plans to increase annual general fund spending by $98.3M from 2010 to 2018, which exceeds the $83.3M that David Cohen increased spending by from 2002 to 2010.
Steve, I agree with Mike Zilles on one thing, you get what you pay for. In Newton’s case, we’ve been paying taxes for infrastructure but the money has been spent elsewhere, on areas that could be best described as bloat. My group and I are voting NO-NO-NO in order to take the money from elsewhere and use it for the schools, and the buildings, and the streets and the sidewalks. That is how we are Moving Newton Forward with Fiscal Responsibility.
Somewhere way up this thread, Terry Malloy suggested comparing Newton’s property tax rates with those of other communities. Here’s a chart of the residential property tax rates of all Mass. cities and towns, highlighting Newton’s current rate and the new rate if all 3 overrides pass (increasing by about $0.50 per $1000, according to Newton’s CFO).
Bruce, is there more to this chart? I only see 42 municipalities, not including most of our immediate neighbors.
Steve, labels for all 351 municipalities won’t fit on the chart, but all the data is there, even if only every Nth one is labeled. You can see all the numbers here.
Joshua: You have it backwards. In recent years, money has been taken out of the general fund to pay for infrastructure; not the other way around. That’s why the DE votes are essential.
Your group’s inability to grasp the most basic facts of City finance, the personal attacks and the disingenuous depiction of the Mayor’s record have hurt your group’s cause and credibility. Which is unfortunate, as opposing voices strengthen these civic decisions.
Should you opt to stay in this arena and advocate opposition to revenue growth, I strongly recommend that you get familiar with city and state financial structure. And give credit where credit is due. That would get people to at least listen to your argument. Good luck to you.
Greg: What is the Newton Needham Chamber of Commerce’s position on these override ballot items?
@Bill. -The Chamber voted to endorse the overrides. Here’s the story: http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x846058735/Chamber-board-supports-Newton-overrides#axzz2NIN03nNq
They acknowledged the additional burden, but suggested that the City’s current needs (coupled with the current administration’s efforts to build fiscal discipline) strongly justified the increase.
Here’s the full statement from the Newton-Needham Chamber
Bill, considering that you’re a hard-core left-wing Democrat, taking advice from you would be like a henhouse asking for security advisory solutions from a fox.
Scott Brown voted with the Democrats 46% of the time and you still vociferously opposed him.
https://twitter.com/bill_brandel
“”In recent years, money has been taken out of the general fund to pay for infrastructure; not the other way around. That’s why the DE votes are essential.”
Is that why $8.4M/year is a permanent operating override (tax hike)
“disingenuous depiction of the Mayor’s record” Come again? I have analyzed and evaluated the Mayor’s record on his terms. He asked me to use 2010 as “Period 0” rather than “Year #1” in analyzing his record even though he was mayor for nearly half of FY 2010 and I have obliged him. He asked me to use the general fund financial reporting instead of the CAFR audited financial reports in order to evaluate his record and I have acceded to his wishes. I have fought this battle on his terms and I have still made my point.
“Your group’s inability to grasp the most basic facts of City finance”
80% of the City’s budget goes to pay Wages, Salaries and Bennies (Hat Tip Setti Warren)
84.2% of the School’s budget goes to pay Wages, Salaries and Bennies (Hat Tip Matt Hills)
$601M in unfunded OPEB
$231M in unfunded Pensions
$220M in outstanding indebtedness
Only $656M in total assets, most of which are illiquid and would probably require an asset impairment charge if this was the private sector
Mayor Warren’s annual spending will increase by $98.5M/year from 2010 to 2018 (Hat Tip Setti Warren)
36% of METCO kids are on Special Education Services (Hat Tip Claire Sokoloff)
10% Enrollment Growth from 2002 to 2013
60% Annual Spending Growth in Newton Public Schools from 2002 to 2013
“the personal attacks” Yet you refuse to acknowledge the personal attacks on my group members, particularly Bill Heck
“And give credit where credit is due.” I already did and I regret doing so because it has been used to justify three extravagantly expensive property tax hikes.
“advocate opposition to revenue growth” The city gets 2.5% increase in its real estate tax levy guaranteed thanks to Prop 2.5. The city also gets revenue growth from “new growth”. Considering that the city took the money that was supposed to have been spent on maintenance and infrastructure and used it elsewhere (the 80% of what we’re spending money on plus a $191M white elephant high school), we believe it is time to take the money from elsewhere and use it to fix the roads, streets, sidewalks, schools and city buildings.
We found that if city workers took a 2 year wage and salary freeze, it would free up enough funds to pay for the spending programs sought by the override without cutting pay, cutting jobs or requiring a Prop 2.5 override. Nearly half the projects sought could be funded in Year 1 of the pay freeze and the rest could be funded in Year 2 of the pay freeze
If city workers took an 18 month total compensation freeze, it would free up enough funds to pay for the spending programs sought by the override without cutting pay, cutting jobs or requiring a Prop 2.5 override. Nearly half the projects sought could be funded in Year 1 of the pay freeze and the rest could be funded in Year 2 of the pay freeze
It doesn’t really matter what else I say, you’ll just call it personal attacks anyway.
Greg, Chris: Thanks. Missed that.