The three Ward 5 Ward Councilor candidates — Kathy Winters, Bill Humphrey, and Rena Getz — met for debate again on Thursday at the Emerson Community Center in a forum hosted by the three area councils in Ward 5: Waban, Newton Highlands, and Lower Falls.
Some takeaways follow. If you have time to watch or listen to the video, you should.
1. A forum co-hosted by the Waban area council. The president and vice-president of the Waban area council are candidates. Hmmm.
2. Candidate Getz’s best answer was a full-throated call for expanded senior services, lamenting the social isolation that some seniors face, calling to double or triple funds for program and services, noting the critical need for infrastructure and transportation services to fully meet seniors’ needs. As noted previously, all three candidates seem like strong advocates for seniors and Candidates Winters and Humphrey had solid answers on NewCAL and seniors, too. But, Candidate Getz was notably thoughtful, knowledgeable, and passionate on the topic.
3. Candidate Getz’s worst answer included an infuriating story of a woman who commutes an hour each way to work in Newton. Candidate Getz’s concern was laudable and appropriate, but the answer to the problem is to dramatically increase housing in the region, something she makes clear over and over that she’s not interested in. Candidate Getz is quite literally part of the reason the woman has to drive an hour.*
4. Yes, it’s great when high-profile folks like Marjorie Arons-Barron volunteer their time for important civic exercises like the forum, but holy cow were her questions slanted anti-development. The questions were ostensibly from the community, but at least one was completely rewritten.
5. You have to do a lot of reading between the lines in these forums. The questions are not designed to elicit sharp distinctions among the candidates and the candidates, for the most part,
6. Candidate Humphrey’s best answer was a sly rebuke of the other candidates’ “I’m here to channel the constituents” refrain. In response to a question about the role of Ward councilor, Candidate Humphrey made the case that the job of a political leader is not just to listen to what constituents say but to go out and make the case for a particular position.
7. Candidate Humphrey also had a nice moment on dealing with change. He continues to cite, effectively, his family’s multi-generation experience living on Chestnut St. The development that his great grandfather found unwelcome became the homes for the cherished neighbors of later generations of Humphreys. And, he confidently made the point to an audience that is mostly hostile to change.
8. Candidate Humphrey stumbled on the question to the candidates about an override. Begging off to learn what the specifics are going to be is not enough. It’s clear we’re going to need more money.
9. Candidate Winters distinguished herself with how clearly she acknowledges reality. Her best answer was her well-reasoned rejection of the city demographer’s conclusions about school enrollment. Candidate Winters flatly noted that the regional housing crisis is putting pressure on Newton that the city cannot fully control and that will be reflected in higher school population that we have to plan for now. Candidate Winters was likewise clear-eyed about affordable housing, stating that love it or hate it, large-scale private development yields affordable housing. And, she was clear that we have to consider development in the larger regional context, not just what’s good for Newton.
11. Candidate Winters also had a nice moment with the inevitable role-of-the-ward-councilor question saying that her job was to act on behalf of the city, but to make sure that the concerns of the ward are brought to the discussion. FWIW, I think the ward v. at-large councilor discussions are mostly theoretical. In practice, some of the biggest ward chauvinists are and have been at-large aldermen/councilors. Maybe there’s a marginal or occasional impact on elections when a councilor ignores the ward’s specific needs, but …
12. Candidate Winters’ low point was her answer on historic preservation, where she basically said she’s in favor of everything, some of which are conflicting: adding housing, reduce teardown vulnerability, promoting historic preservation, reducing climate change. If you believe that some of the issues facing the city require a strong statement of values, this can be frustrating.
13. While it can sometimes challenging to discern the differences among the candidates, some distinctions are becoming clear. On seniors, open space, basic environmental stuff, there does not appear to be much space among the three. It appears that they all basically agree on the need for affordable housing, but not the ends to which they’ll go to get more built.
So, how are they different? Oversimplifying a bit, Candidate Getz is clearly the candidate of limited growth. Candidate Humphrey is clearly the progressive-values candidate, with well-developed positions on development, public services, transportation, fairness, and equality. Candidate Winters is the process/consensus candidate.
Something for everyone!
* Yes, adding more units to Newton might not create a home that this particular woman could afford or would want. But, we participate in a regional housing market. Adding units to Newton creates opportunity and reduces prices across the region.
I do hope that everyone will actually look at the debate and make their own assessments.
I hope that everyone will actually look at the debate video and come to exactly the same conclusions I drew!
Re #8: I haven’t re-watched what I said about overrides, so perhaps my phrasing was unclear, but I thought what I was trying to say was that it would be a good idea to have specific goals for the override money, given the failure in 2008 and the success in 2013. I also assume we will need an override and that I would support one. In particular, one to help fund some of our environmental/energy overhauls.
My vote goes to the person who listens and champion for Ward 5, vs someone who thinks they know better and wants to “convince” us that their views should be ours.
Found some portions of this debate cringe worthy in that regard.
Matt,
Are you suggesting that, on any given issue, there is a single position that represents the ward? Or, are you suggesting that there is a majority position and that the councilor should adopt that position? If you’re suggesting the latter, by what mechanism is the councilor supposed to determine what position to champion?
@sean…
I am suggesting that on the video posted….
One candidate vigorously stands by the Ward
Another comes of as smug (and knows better than everyone else)
While the third stands remains balanced between the above
I am also suggesting that Antonio Brown is more likely to succeed (i.e. Randy Moss) than fail (e.g. Albert Haynesworth).
I’ll watch the video in full after Football.
#sundayevening #footballisback #gopats
@MattLai “One candidate vigorously stands by the Ward” Hoping you can shed some light on your comment here. Assuming you mean Rena Getz is the candidate who stands by the Ward. From my perspective, Rena’s views are *not* consistent with the Ward 5 voters and the numbers from the 2017 election prove that.
http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/86441 In 2017 Ward 5 resoundingly rejected the conservative, regressive platform of incumbent Brian Yates and endorsed the progressive ideas of Councilor Downs. Ward 5 voted for Mayor Fuller and Scott Lennon in the primary over Amy Sangiolo (embraced by the anti-development establishment) and then embraced Mayor Fuller in the general election. And, Ward 5 also was Pro Charter. When you say she is vigorously representing the Ward… who is Rena Getz really representing here? Ward 5 voters who embrace the progressive, Councilor Downs platform or the vocal minority, antidevelopment view point in Ward 5? I’ve got nothing against Rena Getz but just ask that we stop with the false narrative around her representing the view point of Ward 5. She would be better off stating that she is the Anti-Development candidate who is willing to accept PAC support from OptOut. That would be the ultimate in Transparency. Oh, and we do have something in common. We both agree on the Pats and AB. #FootballisBack
@Jack though Matt Lai might not be able to assume what the Voters of Ward 5 stand for I’m not sure 2017 votes would necessarily indicate their views as well. The issue at the forefront of the last election was the Charter Reform which is was supported by Ward 5. The fact that the Voters chose a more pro Charter Reform candidate over Amy Sangiolo who was on the no side I think says more about that issue. What is going on now with Northland and other proposed large developments has changed the landscape significantly and thus people’s current views might reflect those changes. I know that I personally am re-thinking some of the people I voted for in the last election. My perception of their intents regarding development have changed with these large projects. So I’m not sure either if you can make assumption of where people stand yet.
@Newton Highlands Mom We are in agreement. There is no way to be sure whether Rena Getz will vigorously represent the Ward. Bill Humphrey and Kathy Winter will represent the Ward as well as Rena. Interesting view though, from Rena’s donations and participation in the OptOut event we get a glimpse of her allegiances. My biggest challenge with Rena is that she does not participate in the forums and therefore does not clarify her view point on the issues. Instead she has two surrogates in Matt Lai and Bob Burke, who are creating the narrative that Rena Getz speaks for the Ward while the data points show something else or as you pointed out…. the data is at best in conclusive. Tomorrow night will give us a better view. Good luck to all three candidates.
That’s quite a spreadsheet you got there, @Jack. 🙂
My point of view is derived from both offline conversations and the video posted at the top – qualitative, not quantitative.
But also, a lot has happened since 2017. What also may be of interest to all is the Upzoning video posted that’s been gaining momentum here in Newton.
http://www.zonedoutfilm.com/
and
https://youtu.be/qsYOurWEoSc
They speak eerily towards a troubling trend. These videos do a better of articulating the risks than I can. Definitely worth a watch for those who have not.
There are those who believe, if we do not support upzoning, we are somehow not “progressive”. That is a generalizing that could not be futher from the truth.
Rather (and speaking purely from a personal perspective), my support goes to those who want to take a metered point of view on responsible development, and not give our city and region away to what ultimately is a profit motivated push on large scale development that is anything but progressive. #followthemoney
When people refer to resounding defeats or being “more aligned with the Ward”, one does well to fact check. Bill Humphrey repeats this about the Charter but the reality is: 5-1 voted against by 9%, 5-2 voted for by only 1%, 5-3 by barely 2%, and 5-4 by 10% so it passed in Ward 5 by a tiny margin, not exactly a resounding victory.
Chris,
So, the two candidates whose candidacies are centered on their promise to monitor the pulse of the ward did not vote with the majority, but you’re going to quibble with the guy who accurately states that he did?