Kathleen Kouril Grieser, the most visible leader of the no-growth anywhere group Newton Villages Alliance has pulled papers this week to run for Newton City Council.
Kouril Grieser, pulled papers to run for both ward alderman in ward two and at-large, a strategy some candidates adopt if they are either undecided, seeking to throw off potential competitors or perhaps know that an incumbent is not seeking re-election but has yet to publicly announce that.
Just a heads up: you can pull nomination papers for city councilor for someone else.
A good reminder thanks.
Well, let’s just ask the question. Emily Norton, are you running again? Can you confirm?
Also, Greg or someone who runs the blog, can we have a blog post about the proposed Walnut Street Improvements?
I was coming here to say exactly what Ted said. If I recall correctly, there was a similar post about Kathleen two years ago, and we found out shortly after that several NVA supported candidates were running for city council. Is that recollection correct?
Greg, you will likely be amused to remember that you wrote almost the same exact post just under 2 years ago after she pulled papers on behalf of two or three other candidates, rather than for herself. At the time she had already endorsed candidates in her own ward, as well. And my recollection is that the papers can be pulled across ward lines, too. http://village14.com/2015/07/20/globe-reporter-kathleen-kouril-grieser-looking-to-enter-ward-2-contest/#axzz4gfIDRkRU
This post needs a few corrections- as is, it irresponsibly guesses at motivations while missing pertinent facts.
The anti-growth labeling is also mean-spirited and unnecessary.
Don’t be such a hack Greg! The Chamber just wants subtle influence, like cheerleading Governor Baker’s support for a Chamber-endorsed project. No need to resort to click-baiting, slanted, misleading journalism too!
What a joke Greg has a role at V14.
As I recall (though I could be mistaken) Kouril Grieser told the Globe two years ago that she was considering running but did not pull papers and/or have papers pulled on her behalf. Other NVA candidates did emerge but not until days prior to the nomination papers deadline.
@Paul: As they say, if the shoe fits. Show me an example of an instance when the NVA and/or KKG supported growth in Newton and I will stop referring to her and her group as “anti-growth.”
Oh and the chamber isn’t interested in “subtle influence” but nice of you to frame it that way! Nor am I going to apologize for supporting the radical notion that Needham Street is in need of state and federal dollars for a redesign.
Just to put some facts behind the speculation, back in 2015 she donated to three candidates: Brian Yates ($200), Chris Pitts ($250) and Julia Malakie ($100).
http://www.ocpf.us/Reports/SearchItems?PageSize=50&CurrentIndex=1&SortField=&SortDirection=ASC&&SearchType=A&ContributorName=kouril&FilerCpfId=0
@Greg
IIRC- didn’t she have an op-ed outlining a solution to Orr St?
Could Greg or someone else with stats access please answer…
1. how many unique users (visitors) there are on this blog on a daily and/or weekly basis (total, not broken down by post)
2. how many total page views there are, on average, weekly
3. total number of people who post (which appears to be around 50?)
Traffic varies by season and election cycle, no doubt, but just looking for the average number, that’s all. Plus lowest/highest traffic weeks if available.
Thank you.
@ Greg
The less snarky version on the rest of my post:
PS I don’t think every person who reads V14 is 1) aware of you role at the Chamber 2) aware of each position that the Chamber has taken. I recognize many are, it isn’t all of them.
While I think journalistic standards make it clear that you should not be posting any threads on topics pertaining to the Chamber, at minimum your role and relevant positions taken by the Chamber should be transparent on relevant posts.
I get the whole “this is just a blog” thing, but the gap between commonly accepted standards and what’s being done here is too large. Let’s try to be a bit more open and transparent.
PPS The anonymous by-line on the Baker post also pretty bad.
@Alex Jones, I mean, Paul: I’m sure you’re right that not every person visiting this blog knows that I’m employed by the Newton-Needham Regional Chamber, just as not everyone may know that Ted Hess-Mahan, Amy Sangiolo, Emily Norton, etc. are City Councilors or that Andy Levin is editor of the TAB, and so on.
It would be ridiculous for any of us to post a disclaimer with every comment but my day job is disclosed on our about page and if you click on my name for this and every comment.
But what exactly is your beef anyway? Why should I not be allowed to express opinions just as every one else here does?
As for the use of the Village 14 byline on this thread, maybe you haven’t been paying attention but we use that Village 14 byline frequently here on non-opinion threads that simply link and/or quote a news story or website.
Sorry but there’s no conspiracy here.
@Paul – actually I don’t think you get the whole “this is just a blog” thing.
Has anyone ever heard of Godwin’s Law? It states that “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1”.
I wonder if we should have a Reibman’s Law for Village14: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of impugning Greg Reibman’s intentions approaches 1”.
Is KKG going to challenge the sitting Ward 2 councilor? Hmmmm…. Emily Norton did, after all, strongly support the Accessory Apartments ordinance, which KKG (I think speaking on behalf of the NVA) opposed.
Nah…..
Councilor Norton is running for a third term, btw
To “Anonymous” who tried to post something on this thread this morning: We will not approve your comment without a valid email address. Your email address won’t be made public, but it has to work. Please consider trying again.
@Gail, ok no problem, I have typed out my comment again below.
@Bryan Anyways, my point was this: I believe Ms. Kouril Grieser took out papers two years ago, but for School Committee. She backed out after supporting the challenger.
This time around, I have reason to believe she along with Mr. Houston (Spelling)? are running as a slate vs the two at-large Ward 2 councilors. I have to keep my name anonymous because few know this.
On another note, I am ready for a change in the Ward 2 Councilor seat. My niece has to walk to school daily and in the winter has slipped and fell on the ice. Those temporary crossing signals are only in place in the summer. What is supposed to happen in the winter, no one cross the road? Then high schoolers are unfairly ticketed because there is not enough parking, often parking up to 1/2 mile away and having to trudge through sidewalks that are not cleared. When was the last time someone was ticketed for not shoveling?
After Ms. Norton co-sponsored a bill that forced intelligent high school kids to stop flying their homemade Remote Control planes at the high school (or at least pay to do so), I had enough. Those kids are some of our brightest and they would take the time to explain how they worked to my niece. It brings me almost to tears to know they have to pay money to register their devices, when they were helping the Newton community more than any single person, in my mind.
I am a lifelong Democrat, but would vote for someone who cares about our ward before anyone else. Change is welcome!
Good call Trisha and Bryan.
Paul, just like you and I, Greg can comment anything he wants as long as he follows the blog rules. There’s no recusing required to post on V14.
It would make sense for KKG or other well-known NVA members to run against the Ward 2 at-large councilors – Susan Albright and Jake Auchincloss- because they don’t fall in line with Ward 2 counselor – Emily Norton – and the Ward 2 residents she speaks for on new development around Newtonville’s Center.
I find I have much more in common with my at-large councilors’ thinking so I would strongly support them.
Fignewtonville, your request has been granted.
Maybe instead of worrying who KKG has donated to – Maybe we should worry about why Ward Councilors are getting $500.00 donations from Developers and other Interest groups?
@Greg
No conspiracy, just a persistent conflict of interest.
“But what exactly is your beef anyway? Why should I not be allowed to express opinions just as every one else here does?”
I think the key difference is that some of your opinions are on issues where you’re being paid, in part, to influence others in Newton. If you’re starting a blog topic on one of those issues, its fair for people to know that you have a personal/professional stake in the outcome.
On issues where the Chamber has taken a position, your opinion IS different than others. Just like any other human being, your opinions have no doubt been influenced when your professional capacity is at stake– similar to those who thought it was relevant to point our certain commenters were related to landscapers during the leaf blower discussions.
Finally, there is a big difference between comments and initial blog posts. The former are parts of the dialogue, the latter determines the topic of conversation. To be clear, I don’t believe each comment needs disclosure, but doing an initial blog post on an issue where you have a vested professional interest should be pointed out.
PS I highlighted where KKR wasn’t anti-growth when finding a solution on the Orr block, that may have gotten lost in the thread.
I think that transparency in government is critical. To me it speaks volumes about the candidate if s/he cannot be up front with what s/he does….starting with when they plan to seek voter support for candidacy to an elected office.
So if Ms. Kouril-Grieser did not take out papers for herself, I ask that she please share with the city for whom she did take out papers OR would the real candidate(s) please stand up!. It is the right thing to do.
Among the many qualities I admire about Councilor Sangiolo (and would genuinely miss if she no longer worked at City Hall) is her wonderful sense of humor. Turns out, Josh Krintzman also happens to be genuinely funny. That’s a potential continuity I didn’t ever expect.
– now to get this thread back on track – are those her real teeth??
@Paul – has the Chamber taken a position on the topic of this thread, which is KKG pulling papers for City Council?
Seriously, I’ve been following V14, and before that the late, great Tab Blog for many years. I have honestly seen no change in Greg’s general positions on city issues in his posts and comments since he started working for the Chamber.
Thanks Tricia.
@Paul: As a matter of chamber policy, the chamber never has and never will endorse political candidates. So you never, ever, need to ever lose a minute’s sleep when you see me commenting on any political candidate. You can always know that this is my own opinion.
@Tricia
He anonymously posted a blog thread on Needham St a day earlier, where the Chamber is involved.
Dude! Did you read the actual story? It was a news article written by a former Boston Globe reporter reporting on the comments made by the governor, the mayor and the Needham Selectman chair at a chamber event that was open to the public.
And that’s your big non-disclosure scandal? Pfft.
@ Greg
I’ve given up on the convincing you of the conflict-of-interest issue. The endorsement argument is silly.
“Show me an example of an instance when the NVA and/or KKG supported growth in Newton and I will stop referring to her and her group as “anti-growth.””
I did.
I’ll assume you’ve given up because you realize you’re being ridiculous (and probably never even read the article that you and only you seemed so upset about).
Also, I have no idea what you are referring to regarding the Orr Block. How about a hyperlink?
Wrong assumption, Greg.
I clicked on the story the other day. V14 shouldn’t serve as a channel for you to be a cheerleader for Chamber business.
You’re simply not in a neutral position to decide if a Chamber-related story is newsworthy.
@Anonymous: It may please you to hear that after co-docketing the item to require a city-level registration of pilotless aircraft (drones), after listening to all the testimony, and meeting with a constituent who manages a high school drone enthusiast club, I changed my mind on the issue, and voted against it.
@Paul
The Chamber’s mission is to assist and advocate on behalf of its member businesses. He uses this blog to advance some of those causes (such as the need for Needham Street-Highland Ave. reconstruction) even if he is not speaking in an official capacity as president of the NNRC.
I think you are way off base here.
I’m off-base to say he should disclose when he is advancing causes of the Chamber?
Seriously?
I should disclose that I care about Needham Street because I work for the chamber????? I’ve always cared about Needham Street (who in Newton doesn’t?) And for heavens sake the story that I pointed to makes it extremely clear that I work for the chamber so, really, it was disclosed.
Arguing with you Paul is marginally less painful than banging my head against that wall.
Paul, a couple of points:
1) he’s not a journalist anymore. Blog poster doesn’t qualify. Running a blog doesn’t qualify. Standards are different.
2) You and I are both relatively anonymous. For all I know, you are KKG’s dog, blessed with magical typing powers. For all you know, I’m the mayor. (I’m not). At least Greg is posting under his real name, and has made no secret of his job.
3) Additional disclosure is always a nice thing. But most of the posters would call Greg out on any B.S., and frankly, what conflicts of interest are you so concerned with? Greg has been Greg since this blog began. If he suddenly began carrying the water for a new job I’d understand, but has he changed at all?
Emily, always good to know you can change your mind. Just wish you’d done that to benefit the parents at Cabot. I’ll remember your flexibility when my kids are at Carr an additional six months.
Charlie, you crack me up. Out of curiousity, why do folks who run this blog have to answer your questions on audience and number of posters? Who died and made you blog lord? (If that title isn’t taken, can I hate it though).
I think I’m going to post my own slightly off topic requests.
Greg, get me the number of folks who post anonymously.
Gail, give me power to make my own posting topics.
Marti, make every post about Newtonville.
And someone get me a sandwich. I skipped breakfast.
for the record, I’d like to HAVE not HATE the title of Blog Lord.
But since I can’t type, I don’t deserve it. Figgy out.
@Greg
Last post on this:
People shouldn’t have to click-through to find out that they’re reading about something that you have a professional interest in– the objective of advancing the Chamber’s causes have been achieved. More eyeballs on articles advancing a Chamber-friendly viewpoint. I wouldn’t read about a tobbaco lobbyist’s opinion on teenage smoking, and don’t wait to be reading about your opinions that are related to your job. You are undoubtedly influenced by the interests you serve, as are we all.
Those claiming that Greg is the same Greg and not influenced by the Chamber is silly. He’s human like the rest of us. They give him his paycheck, and he’s more susceptible to their views as a result. Just like the rest of us.
Have final word if you’d like.
@Emily
Echoing fig– seeing the real-life impact of the Carr transition, its pretty upsetting that their lives will be impacted for an additional 6 months for something completely avoidable. Its effectively 30 minutes a day of extra commute time for each child. That’s 1000 hours per week of our kids shuttling back and forth between their neighborhood and Carr. Over the additional unnecessary six months, that’s around 20,000 hours of wasted time for Cabot kids. Think about that. Along with Susan and Jake, you did a disservice to the Cabot community.
Paul:
I don’t think Jake was involved, it was mostly Emily and Susan on the Cabot item. At least in my view.
Cabot School and Cabot Park was a complete failure of our Ward 2 leadership. School got delayed, the park doesn’t get updated, and we’ll get a gigantic storage facility with trucks and larger vehicles running along Newtonville Ave.
But I digress I guess. But boy, are folks at Cabot angry. At least the folks I talk to.
Obviously for the Cabot Community having a Ward Councilor was useless. Another good reason to get rid of ward councilors.
I for one SUPPORT Paul on this. Getting a fat paycheck from the chamber = conflict of interest on like half the posts here. Is it that hard to stick something at the end your posts, Greg – I am paid lobbyist for the chamber?
Also can V14 stop smearing candidates Greg and the chamber hates?
I’m not a paid lobbyist. I work for a not-for-profit 501 (C) 6, which is very restrictive in terms of lobbying.
I suppose the fatness of my paycheck is in the eyes of the beholder.
I love my job and wouldn’t give it up for anything but I didn’t take it for the money and have had offers that would have earned me much more.
I am very protective of my personal and professional integrity.
Transparency has always been very important to who I am. I certainly don’t keep where I work any kind of secret.
It’s more than a little ironic that I’m being called on the carpet for not being transparent enough by two individuals who don’t use their real names.
Anonymous, and Paul, you’re asking a lot of the posters here at V14. We are residents, some with jobs and some retired, who post news, entertainment or opinions – sometimes both. It’s a blog not a newspaper with bloggers not journalists. There is no conflict of interest in a blog – no recusing is necessary. Calling certain candidates “anti-development” may not be to your liking but it is an adjective that fits KKG’s profile.
I find it incredibly absurd to for two anonymous commenters to demand transparency from bloggers who post threads. You could be anyone with any job and receive a fat paycheck. You could be a spokesperson for a candidate. You may not even live in Newton. Yet you are “smearing” Greg for voicing an opinion. Do you know who all the other posters are and what they do – ’cause we surely don’t know you.
You’re lucky because you can choose to continue to anonymously comment on both news stories and opinion pieces on V-14 preferably without co-opting a thread to claim conflict of interest and/or start a blog, with your own rules, where you can state your name and position at the beginning of every post without smearing anyone.
@Paul and his friend, Anonymous – you do realize that Greg and Sean, two private individuals with long (some might add checkered, but that’s not me) histories as bloggers, started Village14 back in 2011, right? While it has become, IMHO, a wonderful community resource, it is not a civic entity; its focus and very existence is completely at their discretion. Neither you nor I nor anyone else has any standing to make demands about what issues should covered or how they should be discussed. Blogs succeed or fail based on views and participation, and given V14’s continued growth and activity over the years, it seems clear that it’s working. But if you aren’t happy with the bloggers or the discussions, that’s OK – you can find (or start) another blog more to your liking. It’s that simple.
Might I suggest enough of this particular topic. Paul can certainly post when he feels Greg is conflicted, and Greg can post whatever he wants.
I was amused by the fat check comment by anonymous.I always picture someone cashing one of those Publisher Clearinghouse gigantic checks, laughing manically. Boo wah haha.
@Fig- This is a great community resource and it makes sense to let everyone know how much potential reach the messages we post here have. Even if it’s only 500 page views a week, it’s still reaching a handful of really key voters. I would hope it’s more than that…and would love to know. Why keep it a secret ?
Greg’s president of the Newton-Needham Chamber of Commerce?
Marti one of my very first comments her on V14 was on a post about sexual abuse. I was a victim and I said so. I appreciate the chance to share my experience and opinion here and read what other residents have to say but neither you or Greg or anyone else can criticize me for not using my real name or demand I reveal my identity as part of some sort of holier than thou ethical bragging contest.
Greg I am no legal expert but when someone gets paid to convince the mayor and state senators and the council and city officials and to do things for businesses that sounds an awful lot like lobbying to me. Maybe not technically. So I give you that.
And anyway is it so hard to add something saying that you are paid by the chamber when there is a conflict?
Tricia I don’t know Paul. No idea who he is. But he has a point. Like he said V14 shouldn’t be a channel for cheerleading for the chamber and local companies and slamming people who take a different view.
@Annonymous: We allow and welcome pseudonyms here for many reasons, including the one you shared (although I wish you would choose an actual pseudonym; we have several people posting as “Anonymous” making it impossible to know which “Anonymous” is writing.)
But we also allow others — including Marti and me — to point out the hypocrisy of anonymous posters criticizing someone else for not being transparent enough for them. And Paul and you are being hypocrites.
Now, you ask, would it be..
Yes it would.
There are probably 100,000 comments on this blog. I’m sure I’ve started several thousand threads. Every thread is about Newton. Some I spend hours writing, others seconds. I cannot and will not stop each time and think “is this one that I need to disclose: I’m president of the chamber?” That would be cumbersome beyond belief for me, tedious for readers… and really really silly. And where would I draw the line anyway?
Meanwhile:
1. My day job is disclosed in “About” on the top of every page.
2. If you click on my name here it goes to the chamber’s website.
3. Google me and you’ll find out what I do too.
I am not keeping this a secret (except from Gail, thanks for spoiling that Paul!)
I’m not a government employee. This is a volunteer run blog. No one is forced or required to come here. If Paul, you and anyone else is unhappy with that you can volunteer to stop reading and commenting at any time.
@Anonymous – you’ve missed my point. What V14 should or should not be is not up to Paul, or you, or me. And posting anonymously is fine, but those of us who choose to post anonymously do forfeit the right to accuse others of a lack of transparency.
Paul and Anonymous you raise a good point. Just to clear up any possible confusion about my motivation for any of my posts I want to come clean that I was the CEO and a member of the board of Ford. and that I do sometimes weigh in on Village14 about transportation related topics
Paul and Charlie – Greg owes you nothing. No one who posts here owes you anything.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
Fig wrote: Cabot School and Cabot Park was a complete failure of our Ward 2 leadership. School got delayed, the park doesn’t get updated, and we’ll get a gigantic storage facility with trucks and larger vehicles running along Newtonville Ave.
False. Cabot kids were always scheduled to return to Cabot School in September 2019, nothing changed on that front. I think you were even at the meeting where the school administrators said they did not favor having kids move in the middle of the school year.
And for you to say “park doesn’t get updated” because I did not support carving out a chunk of Cabot Park to turn it into an asphalt parking lot, well we’ll just have to agree to disagree on what “updating” means when it comes to parks.
And the storage facility was a unanimous vote save one.
But the bigger point is, even though you think I am doing a terrible job as your ward councilor, you should still support keeping the position of ward councilor. Why? Because it is easier for you to attempt to unseat me as a ward councilor than if I were an at-large councilor. No one else in the rest of the city cares as much as you and other Ward 2 residents about Cabot School, Cabot Park, or the storage facility on Newtonville Ave, so you’d have a tough time getting residents elsewhere to care enough to vote against me for those reasons.
It’s about accountability, and representation. Do we really want a system where I can tick off all of Ward 2, yet be re-elected handily because the rest of the city either doesn’t know or doesn’t care about what is going on in Ward 2?
(As it happens I think I’m doing a TERRIFIC job representing Ward 2, Fig notwithstanding, but my point stands.)
@Jane- Please don’t try to drag me into someone else’s discussion.
Meanwhile… that’s a great Forrest Gump quote you have there!
Emily –
Alternative fact: “False. Cabot kids were always scheduled to return to Cabot School in September 2019, nothing changed on that front.”
Cabot students were scheduled to move into their new building in January 2019, not September.
I feel bad for ward councilor Norton, for if she was at large she would not have to deal with a guy like me! Just ask councilor Albright…
Charlie – I thought so! (about the quote)
Emily-In 5 of the last 9 elections, not one ward councilor has had an opponent. At-large seats are contested at a much higher rate.
@Jane: Perhaps ward councilors are less likely to have opponents because people are generally happy with them…. bc ward councilors know they’re more vulnerable to a challenger, so they work extra hard to be responsive & available.
Agree with Andrea on Emily Norton’s mischaracterization of the Cabot process. The new school was originally scheduled to open in January 2019.
It wasn’t until the “pause” was taken last year (to review and reconsider the previously approved renovation plan) — causing the project to delay its MSBA submission — that it became obvious that would no longer be possible. At that point, the City stated that the timeline was “highly ambitious” and that allowing for two full years would be preferable.
http://cabot.projects.nv5.com/download/meeting_minutes%20Cabot/2016-05-05-CSBC-DRC-Meeting-Minutes-APPROVED.pdf
Check the election data. Some ward councilors have more blanks than votes and still don’t have opponents. A blank rate of even 40% indicates a level of dissatisfaction. The data shows that ward councilors are in fact much less vulnerable to opponents. In purely municipal elections (20o7, 2011, 2015), actual voters (not just registered voters) enter a polling place knowing that the only candidates on the ballot will be for city council and school committee seats and blank the ward councilor in very high numbers.
So far this year, only one incumbent ward councilor has an opponent while 3 at-large councilors already do and there’s reason to believe that a few more candidates will run.
Whether a person is challenged or not is never the point. That argument, in part, goes to the term limits issue, which does not seem to be causing anyone grief.
It’s very possible that someone might not be challenged because they are doing a great job. Or they are not challenged because the bar for a challenge is too great. There are several reasons why there might not be a challenge.
But getting rid of the lowest bar entry point into the electoral process is completely counter-intuitive to the goal of getting more participation.
If you say you want to be more inclusive (and you actually mean it), you really can’t be in favor of getting rid of the Ward elected Councilors. It’s the most democratic and ultimately accountable direct path to elected public service.
That’s why it’s so difficult to comprehend how the Commission members got it so wrong. Starting at “Day One”…as Bryan’s minutes so clearly stated.
The data indicates otherwise. No ward councilors in 5 out of 9 elections have had an opponent – even when more of their constituents blank them than vote for them. Why is the bar too high when election results indicate a significant level of dissatisfaction? Why does the so called higher bar entry point (at-large councilors) attract a larger pool of candidates?
Charlie,
How can the fact that I can’t vote for or against Emily (because I’m not in her ward) be Democratic???
@Jane- As stated, there may have been greater dis-satisfaction by a particular individual who run to run against the incumbent. The fact is, we don’t know.
@Tom- Because you don’t live in her district. You have your own Ward person you can vote for or not vote for. PLUS 2 at larges which more than balances out the localized objection. There is a reason why it works as is. There is also a reason why it would work as 8 ward and 8 at large, even though neither is perfect….because nothing is perfect.
The current proposal is simply way worse than either the current or the 8/8 version because it centralizes power, favors special interests, and makes it very hard for independent voices to have a seat at the table.
And to those who say the 8/8 version puts too much power in hands of ward elected, my response is I’d rather have more power in the hands of the most accountable people…..and less power centralized.
Greg is the head of the Chamber of Commerce? And worked for the TAB?
You will be happy to find out that KKG is extremely pro development – the commercial kind! As is anyone who realizes how broke the city is having stretched every budget beyond reason, and is not looking forward to reappraisals, overrides, and other dips into their wallets.
Years ago when I moved to Newton, I tried to understand why a community considerably more moneyed than the one I came from in Michigan, had an elementary school in far worse shape than anything I had seen. Continuously sleuthing out the complex answer, I only recently understood how Newton has made some serious mistakes, in spite of warnings, that has led to its current situation.
It’s the topic of my ongoing series: Fix It First over at the “other” BLOG. http://newtonforum.org/fix-first-part-2-no-housing-crisis/
@Tom: Why is it fair that Needham doesn’t get to vote on Ruth Balser and Kay Khan?
@Emily
You are incorrect about new Cabot’s start date. I can go pull up the initial announcements on the timelines of the three schools if you like.
The delay was made in concert with the drawn-out process to approve the Cabot plan– it was failed leadership. I respect you a lot, but you need to own this.
@Paul – Please recall there was a vote of the Cabot School Building Committee to review the location of the gym. In other words many people favored taking this step not just me. At that meeting it was stated that it is not ideal to move students and classrooms in the middle of the year so in all likelihood the decision would have been made to keep the students in Carr through the end of the school year. After waiting for far too long the Cabot community is going to get a fabulous new school. I think that is something to celebrate. Many other neighborhoods in our City are still waiting for their schools to be modernized and could be forgiven for wondering why the glass half empty outlook here.
@Emily
I remember the details well. You are certainly not the only one responsible for this poorly run process, but you were certainly a central player into the unnecessary delay.
While it is true that it was stated that it isn’t ideal to move in the middle of the year at that meeting, it had not been stated in any other forum. 2 of our 3 new schools were planned that way. Its hard to see that as anything but an isolated statement trying to make the best out of a bad situation. The reality is that Angier’s mid-year move went extremely well. There were no prior hints of a need to extend the delay another six months until that point in the process. The additional six months had little to nothing to do with what’s best for the students, but a result of our representatives unable to complete the process within the 18+ month planning process. It was a leadership failure.
Being told that I should just be grateful that the school is coming and to keep quiet about mistakes, is rather insulting. It shouldn’t be this hard for you and others to simply acknowledge the mistake and move on.
The “others” in Newton may need to be reminded that Cabot was rated to have the worst school condition by the MSBA, yet somehow was third in line, the only one delayed and not a fully new building- compromising optimal learning conditions. Perhaps with the full set of facts they would understand why so many in the Cabot community are fed up at this point.
But as the Ward Councilor, you’re aware of this, of course. So its great that you’re not one of those that would be questioning why the Cabot community is so upset.
@Paul – Cabot families are getting a brand new school. It’s going to be fantastic. If I lived in the Cabot district I would be thrilled about that. I think it is something to be very happy about. That’s all I’m saying.
Emily::
While I certainly disagree with you on many issues (and agree on others), I think you are missing/ignoring the frustration many of the Cabot families felt about decision to ignore the strong wishes of the PTO and the many parents at the Cabot school construction meetings about reopening the process. And I believe you are incorrect (and as Paul said above, refusing to own this) and that many of the folks talking to the parents said plainly that the concern was that the school plan wouldn’t pass the city council without the strong approval of the Ward 2 councilers. I might have the terms wrong, but that was made very clear to the parents.
And for someone who puts such a focus on the need for ward councilers, I’d imagine that your position to reopen the gym discussion held huge sway, as you were the local counciler. You can’t have it both ways and claim that ward councilors have a special role, and not acknowledge that your role in “leading” the charge of reopening the design was central to the delay. The other city councilers weren’t going to go against the ward 2 reps without your approval. I blame Susan as well, but if the ward counciler position has any role of meaning in my view, it would be in situations like this.
As for us being satisfied with the new school, please don’t patronize. Of course we are thrilled with a new school. But it has been a long long process. We were the second worst school site (and I’d argue we were the worst), but we were the third constructed. Many of us have kids who will never see the inside of the new school since they will age out. The process was very frustrating. Your role in it was very frustrating. The fact that my kids will be bused for an extra six months is very frustrating. Paul and I and the rest of the parents can be thrilled about the new school, but criticize the process and your role in it. Just because the end result eventually ends with a new school doesn’t mean we don’t get to criticize your role (and Susan’s role in this)
As for the park and the storage unit, that will need to wait for another post.
@Emily
I get that’s all you’re saying. That’s the problem.
You need to be saying that you acknowledge and accept some responsibility for an additional 6 month delay that was avoidable if the process was run more effectively. And that you feel bad that the ineffectiveness means that each Cabot kid will be spending an additional 30 minutes commuting back and forth for those six months. As I wrote above, its 20,000 hours of wasted commute time for Cabot kids. That should not be OK.
A simple acknowledgement and apology. No one’s perfect. But if you’re not willing to admit mistakes, I and others get concerned about who is representing us.
@Paul: we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. I think it was the right decision to try to site the gymnasium on the other side of the site. The building will hopefully be there for 50-100+ years, and many of us, including many of your neighbors, would have preferred to protect the view of the historical building. I get that that is not your priority, but my job is to look out for everyone’s interests, including the interests of future Cabot area residents. We looked into it, it was not feasible, that was the end of it. In the scope of things I am much more concerned that we are being asked to vote on a budget that closes a budget gap by raising fees on families, and that still sends kindergartners home at 12:30PM 3 days a week.
You had 18 months to get the job done, Emily.
You’re still not hearing me. I’m focused on the inability to address these issues within the prescribed timeframe. The concerns over siting were known the prior fall. It should have been worked through at that time. There was enough time.
Kids are now paying the price.
Your inability to even acknowledge the problems in the process is startling. This was not well-run in the final four months.
@Paul were you at the meetings? We were actually not presented with the details of the gym location until late in the process.
This is ridiculous. I agree the budget gap is a crucial topic we should be focused on. But that has nothing to do with Paul’s point.
The “pause,” advocated by a seemingly very small minority of residents and backed 100% by our “representative” councilors (who were anything but), resulted in a month long delay that eliminated the possibility of completing the project in 18 months.
The gym was in the same location (give or take 10 feet north/south) on Apr 5 when the design was approved, on May 5 when the pause was approved, and on June 2 when the original design was approved for the second time.
What have you guys not figured out – Our Councilors are only worried about the Minority opinions. Not the Majority ones. This is who we have elected thinking they would supposedly represent us. Very sad.
@Emily
You’re bordering on dishonest now.
Concerns about the gym location were raised at the May 2015 meeting. All of the designs shown in the October and November 2015 meetings showed the gym location in the final location. Yes there were those that were nitpicking over its placement on the order of 10-20 feet. But the blockage of views from the recommended gym location were known for quite a while.
You had from May 2015 to April 2016 to explore and finalize the gym location– from the time it was clear the design had coalesced on a specific gym location and concerns were raised, until the time where it needed to be decided without incurring a delay. And you could not get it done.
That is a pretty horrible process. I’m not even mentioning that the Cabot PTO had to virtually scream to get to a traffic plan that was SAFE for the kids.
Its pretty upsetting that you’re digging in your feet on this.
@Paul – As you may recall the Potter property became available well into this process, opening up possibilities that had not previously existed on such a constrained site. It would have been better if the possibility of the gym being in a different location as a result of the acquisition of the property had been communicated sooner, but that didn’t happen. As I have pointed out, I was one of many who voted in favor of this review. I get that you disagree with that vote, but I’m not bordering on dishonest or even edging close to it.
@Emily
The borderline dishonesty was suggesting that the gym location was late in the game, and I provided evidence that it happened a year prior to the decision.
The Pottery property offer was November, IIRC, and closed in February. There were multiple months to get the job done without impacting the April deadline.
I’m seriously amazed that you’re simply unable to acknowledge that you and others could’ve done better. The CSBC met in May 2015, not again until October 2015, once more in November 2015, and then not again until March 2016. These issues were festering the whole time and the group didn’t take them on for a whole year. Those concerned with the gym location never had there issues addressed until April 2016. That was too late. It wasn’t sufficiently addressed before that. That’s a mistake. I don’t understand why its so difficult to acknowledge that.