Newton Patch has this story about Building Newton’s Future.
This is from Building Newton’s Future’s press release…
Building Newton’s Future is a grassroots organization co-chaired by Newton residents Emily Prenner and Marcia Tabenken, and honorary co-chairs Dan Fahey and Rob Gifford. It was formed in response to Mayor Setti Warren’s Oct. 15 proposal to the Board of Aldermen to raise $11.4 million in additional tax revenue to address critical city needs. Once the aldermen approve the override request, Newton voters will be able to weigh in on the override on March 12, 2013.
Folks who recall Newton’s last override attempt in 2008 will recall that Fahey was one of the co-founders of the anti-override committee last time. Fahey’s cochair, Jeff Seideman, told me last night that he’s supporting the override this time as well.
I support all three of these overrides and will encourage people to vote for them.
I believe Mayor Warren made a mistake structuring them the way he did, and wonder if he’s still going to be Mayor when this package comes to a vote. I’d like to see him make a commitment to remain in office through voting day.
I’m appalled by the obstructionist position of the Massachusetts School Building Authority [MSBA], which has unfairly forced Newton to divide this critical initiative into three separate votes. The MSBA mission is to help communities build schools, not hinder that process as they are doing in Newton.
Mike: This “package comes to a vote” in March. Where exactly do you think Mayor Warren is going between now and then?
Washington D.C.
I’ll try not to sound too maudlin here, but it says something good to me about local politics when Dan Fahey and Rob Gifford, two upstanding men who fought the good fight on opposite sides last time, can join and work together this time.
I agree fully Steve. Dan and Rob are both really fine people.
But I am surprised that a group with this much gravitas would debut with a website that is clearly not yet ready for prime time. What’s the rush?
For the matter, why announce the formation of a ballot initiative committee before you even have ballot questions?
I’m not suggesting they shouldn’t be organizing internally but we’re still five months away. The aldermen still need to approve this. The mayor has just begun explaining this to the public and, unlike David Cohen, I believe the public is predisposed to listen to what this mayor has to say. Does he really need an outside group’s help — and their website — before he even holds his first town meeting?
Doesn’t matter who the folks were in 2008 on either side of the defeated override. That was then – this is now. The economy is not what it was then, more folks looking for work, socio-economic geographically based differences in Newton culture parochial interests – Are folks from say Nonantum going to fund a school for folks in Waban? We need to no longer ‘think outside the box’ but instead recognize and accept that there is no longer a box. The Mayor needs to go door to door in the Lake, as he did when he was candidate Warren – retire the shoes with the holes in the soles, get a pair of old fashion hiking boots, make the local door to door sales pitch, forget about his national campaign tours and get down to business at hand..
Greg,
Why do you feel the need to be critical of Building Newtons’s Future for launching a campaign and a website early. So the website is rather basic at this point. It stills gives them a web presence and a portal for concerned citizens to contact them, and get involved or give feedback. To me it seems like BNF appears pro-active and well organized.
…and I’m giving feedback.
Its a political campaign and the campaign has already begun as evidenced by the comments in the last few days here and on the Tab blog. The sooner they’re up and running, the better – even with a preliminary web site
4 years ago, when I was involved with the effort to defeat the $12 million override, I could only have hoped there would be a day when, because Newton’s fiscal house had been righted, I would be able to get behind a legitimate effort to provide added funds to ensure Newton’s success going forward. I’m so pleased that day has come. And I will work hard to help convince Newton’s citizens why this is necessary and prudent to pass this override.
One activity I would encourage all who like to participate in this blog to do is to make the effort to read or watch [on NewTV] the presentation materials developed by the city. Knowing the facts will, I believe, make your own thoughts more thoughtful and relevant as you weigh the pros and cons of the override.
Greg has asked “what’s the rush,” to get up a website and become public so soon? In part I think it would be because there’s already questions swirling about in cyberspace, and perhaps conclusions been drawn based on incomplete information.
One thing that has always struck me about Setti and his administration is the devotion to being as fully transparent as possible. He’s changed that old close-to-the vest culture quickly and dramatically. That means there’s a plethora of information available and anything, including the early formation of this group, that helps to advance the dissemination of that info has to be useful.
Thanks, Greg, for your feedback. We hope to continue to get lots of feedback from the community throughout the campaign and see Village 14 as a great way to get out our message and learn what’s on people’s minds.
Adding to what Dan said, we wanted a way to organize and connect the hundreds of people who are already asking, “How can I get involved?” While the website is barebones at the moment, it establishes a web presence, enables people to sign up to get involved, and offers a place where people will be able to find news and information as the campaign unfolds.
The Aldermen will approve it. Probably 24-0. Anyone on the BOA who might be against it will cover themselves by saying the vote will simply put the question in front of the voters. Which is true.
As far as the web site goes, not every site can launch as nicely as http://www.nnchamber.com. If it was really nice, people would probably say “look at how slick they are spending all that money on it”. That’s Newton. The site looks fine and included the press release with some basic numbers on it and it will get better, no doubt. Geeesh.
The fact that Dan F. and Jeff S. are supporting this effort is a very positive sign.
This is a very difficult time for many residents in Newton and an increase of 400 dollars (more or less) is not a small thing to ask of many residents. Remember, its not just a one time increase. It (the general override portion) raises the floor from which we start the 2.5 increases each year moving forward.
One item of concern: At the end of (some) of the current 3 year contracts, new “steps” are implemented on the final day. This means that automatic raises are implemented and our investment in our employees will increase. How are those to be funded and is that factored in?
If the override presentation makes fiscal sense to those in our city of more modest means, it will have a chance of passing. Otherwise, we risk another case of the wealthiest among us attempting to “do good” while being perceived as oblivious to the plight of thousands of families who struggle every day to stay in Newton.
I’m looking forward to seeing the numbers and learning more about the proposal.
I agree with Charlie that the board will (and ultimately should) approve putting this before the voters. But I hope our aldermen do their full due diligence and examine and consider this carefully, as is their obligation.
BTW, I wasn’t able to find a copy of the docketed item online. Am I just missing it?
I’ll ask this question again, though no-one seems to want to answer it or to have the answer. Why is it costing us $90 million at $3 million per year for 30 years for the two elementary schools, if these are the correct numbers? How much will each school cost to build and how many students will there be? This seems high. And what does this portend about all the other infrastructure items that need to be built after these schools?
Barry,
My understanding is that a debt exclusion lasts 20 years, not 30. So the $3 million for 20 years is $60 million and I was under the impression that a new school would cost roughly $25 million ( the two schools together would cost $50 mil). So, the numbers are alittle bit more in line. If you’re right and they’re extending it out to 30, then I have no answer for the extra $30-40 million.
@Greg the item was filed after the docket deadline and no request to suspend the rules to accept a late filed item therefore is not slated to be accepted onto the docket until Nov 5th.
I agree with Greg’s original statement about the formation of a ballot initiative committee for these overrides. Who formed the committee? When and how did this committee come to be?
Somehow, I have this sinking feeling that I’m supposed to be one of those people whom the organizers expect will be clamoring to know “how can I be involved?” I have no recollection of asking for feedback about this initiative or an invitation to be involved, so don’t expect me to be clamoring to be involved in this effort. I’ll vote for it, but clamor? – not happening.
Thanks Jane.
Mostly, I’m mystified by the timing. Mayor Warren and his team are perfectly capable of selling this right now, why call in the calvary? Why not try and create the illusion that citizens went to the town meetings, read the five year plan, read the mayor’s column in the TAB, toured Angier and Cabot, asked some hard questions, did some soul searching and then decided, by golly, to organize in support?
Now I can imagine that this committee wants to be able to raise money for all those glossy postcards and robo calls we’ll be getting in February and March. But, honestly, how much can they reasonably expect to raise before we get past the last-minute begging for cash related to the current election?
If this group had asked for my advice (they didn’t) I would have suggested waiting until after this election day and ideally until after the aldermen have had a chance to at least pretend they’ve kicked the tires.
I’m totally maxxed out on financial contributions after the 2012 campaign, as I’m sure many other residents are as well. Does that mean that the people who formed this committee focused on those of greater means and simply forgot to include the sweat equity crowd in the decision making? I certainly expected to go to town meetings and have the opportunity to be part of a grassroots campaign.
I was a volunteer on the winning side of the 2008 override fight. I saw the writing on the wall after the 2008 elections and moved out of Newton a year later. I didn’t want to be a cow to be milked by my political leaders. My instincts were spot on. First the President’s federal tax hike. Then the Governor’s state tax hike proposal. Now a Newton local tax hike. Does anyone see a pattern here? Democrats = tax hikes. At least these pols won’t make it a trifecta for me because I’ve moved. Good luck to the fighters of this audacious revenue grab, I hope you beat it back.