City Council Continues 10-Year Battle for 311 Service

The City Council held hearings Thursday on an improved constituent service hotline. Despite the Boston Globe's recent trumpeting of the issue, they buried coverage of the Council hearing to page B4 (probably because City Editor Brian McGrory vowed in 2003 "never spill a drop of ink writing about the Boston City Council") -- and then buried the most alarming quotation towards the bottom of the story:

[Boston Chief Information officer Bill Oates] acknowledged a switch to the catchy and simple 311 could elicit a flood of new calls.

"One of the challenges of 311 is we don't want to turn the button on 311 and have a volume [of calls] that will overwhelm the capacity of the call center," Oates said. He said city officials are currently focused on improving the city's response to calls made to the mayor's hot line. "It's a fairly well-known number," Oates said.

Yes, you read that correctly: a top city official doesn't want to roll out a service that more people would call -- he wants to keep the call volume at its current, low level.

The city's CIO also seems to think that the phone number of the Mayor's hotline is well-known, which is a disputable assertion. (See poll below.)

On top of that, a quick search of the record shows that the City Council has been lobbying -- unsuccessfully -- for the 311 service for over a decade.


The Phone Number Few People Know -- Or Call

The truth seems to be both that Boston's current system has a very low call volume compared to comparable cities, and that most residents don't know where to call.

The population of Baltimore is only 20% larger than Boston, yet its 311 service -- the first ever rolled out in the U. S. -- receives about 3000 calls (4.6 calls per 1000 residents) compared to Boston's 450 (0.8 calls per 1000 residents) to the "Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service Hotline." And of Boston's small number of calls, the city claims that around 80% are never logged because they are merely informational requests, not complaints. That leaves Boston with only 80 substantive calls per day (0.14 per 1000 residents) to the Mayor's hotline. New York City? Forty thousand calls per day to their 311 number since it started in late 2002, or 5.0 calls per 1000 residents.

Why so few calls in Boston? Are there no potholes in the city?

In last fall's Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor campaign, at a candidates' forum I asked one candidate, Rosie Hanlon, if she ever used the Mayor's hotline (she said no); a number of other candidates privately admitted the same. Only half of the candidates for Councilor-At-Large claimed to have used the system when responding to a written questionnaire. (Two other candidates dodged the question, while Councilor Felix Arroyo candidly admitted, like Hanlon, to never having called the number.)

In my roles both as a blogger and a member of several civic groups, I often hear complaints about city services. Very, very few people in my experience know the phone number of the Mayor's hotline; many people don't even know that the hotline exists. And those people are the ones who are involved at some level in community events -- civic leaders and long-time, not transient, residents. (Some of the noisiest complainers in Brighton have admitted to me they have never called the number!)

It's quite clear to me: the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service Hotline doesn't get many calls because most people either don't know it exists, or don't know the phone number off the top of their head.

When you combine that observation with CIO Oates' statement that the city doesn't want an increase in call volume anytime soon, the cynical argument is that the city wants to keep the current system to avoid dealing with constituents and their complaints.


City Council Held Hearings About Rolling Out 311 Service -- In October 1997

In the 1996 presidential campaign, President Bill Clinton gave a speech in Sacramento, California pushing the concept of a city services phone number for non-emergency services, as part of his support for community policing. The City of Baltimore rolled out their service in October 1996, and the Federal Communications Commission approved the use of the 3-1-1 phone number in February 1997.

Former Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor Brian Honan joined with current Councilor-At-Large Stephen Murphy to hold hearings in October 1997 (archive fee) to look into having a 311 service in Boston:

Lost pets, illegally parked cars, noisy parties, cars blocking driveways and a host of other issues are regularly fielded by emergency operators, according to City Councilor Brian Honan. He said he is concerned that the calls bog down the 911 system, making it more difficult for police, fire and emergency officials to promptly respond to more serious emergencies "In terms of Boston, there is a significant number of nuisance calls into our 911 system," said Honan, who represents the Allston-Brighton district and proposed the hearing along with Councilor at Large Stephen J. Murphy. "We're going to examine the issue to see if it's a feasible, viable option to adopt a 311 system."

Murphy, who chairs the Committee on Public Safety, which will hold the hearing, said the concept mimics a program in Baltimore, where the number of calls to 911 dropped by 43 percent as a result of the new public nuisance line.

The Globe recently noted that Councilor Murphy "has been pressing the city to adopt 311 for nearly a decade"; actually he's been doing it for just over a decade, albeit more to relieve "nuisances" from the 911 line than to deliver constituent services.

Despite this pressure, city officials aren't totally giving in, according to the Globe: "[Mayor Thomas] Menino's spokeswoman, Dot Joyce, said the existing hot line has served the city well."

Which might be true if "well" means having a number that few people seem to know and even fewer call.


Online Poll

I have put up an online poll about what number you should call if you wanted to have a pothole filled today. No Peeking! No Searching Online! The point is to see if the readers here know, off the top of their heads, what number to call.

To vote, you have to load the full website in a browser.

Candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large have responded to a questionnaire I gave to them at the conclusion of the candidates forum on October 10, 2007.  One candidate, William Estrada, did not attend that forum -- and all indications are that he is not actively campaigning.  Two other candidates, David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy, attended the forum but did not respond to the questionnaire.

The instructions to the candidates were that they should submit responses by COB on Monday, October 22. All responses submitted by then would be posted at the same time, so no one could read another's responses in advance. No word limit was imposed, although I suggested approximately a paragraph (2-4 sentences) in the response to each question --although some questions may naturally lead to a longer or shorter response.  All responses are published in their entirety without editing, although I have done a little bit of re-formatting for consistency in layout. None of them have been fact-checked, either.

I have organized the responses into two sets of posts:  one set by candidate name, and the other by question.  That way you can read all of the answers given by one candidate, or you can read all of the responses to one particular question side-by-side.


Questions

1. If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?  Click here for responses.
   
2. What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?  Click here for responses.
3. Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?  Click here for responses.
4. Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  Click here for responses.
5. Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  Click here for responses.
6. Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  Click here for responses.

Answers by Candidate  (click on names to see all their responses)

1. Councilor Felix Arroyo
2. John Connolly
   
3. William Estrada
4. Councilor Michael Flaherty
5. Matthew Geary
6. Martin Hogan
7. Councilor Stephen Murphy (did not respond)
8. David Wyatt (did not respond)
9. Councilor Sam Yoon

Other Candidate Questionnaires in the Councilor-At-Large Race

Various organizations and media entities typically submit questionnaires to the candidates, like this one.  Some get published widely, while others might end up only viewed by that organization's endorsement committee.  Here are links to a couple of other questionnaires that I know about.  Please send me information on any other questionnaires available online, if you know about them.

Note that I culled out information from all of those questionnaires, and the October 10th candidates forum, related to the issue of splitting off the planning functions from the BRA.

Allston Brighton Community Blog Questionnaire (Harry Mattison):

1. Councilor Felix Arroyo
2. John Connolly (did not respond)
   
3. William Estrada (did not respond)
4. Councilor Michael Flaherty
5. Matthew Geary (did not respond)
6. Martin Hogan
7. Councilor Stephen Murphy
8. David Wyatt (did not respond)
9. Councilor Sam Yoon

Asian Pacific American Agenda Committee (APAAC) questionnaire-in-one-file:

1. Councilor Felix Arroyo
2. John Connolly (did not respond)
   
3. William Estrada
4. Councilor Michael Flaherty
5. Matthew Geary (did not respond)
6. Martin Hogan (did not respond)
7. Councilor Stephen Murphy (did not respond)
8. David Wyatt
9. Councilor Sam Yoon

Previous Information on Councilor-At-Large Race

Some such information can be seen by loading the full Brighton Centered website.  Other links include:

• Audio from 10/10/07 candidates forum in Brighton
  
• Campaign finance summary as of 10/15/07 ... 9/30/07
  
• Written and verbal on Harvard science complex
  
• Candidate positions on creating a City Planning Department
  
• Links to candidate websites, phone numbers, etc.
  
• Candidate positions on casino gambling in the city of Boston
  

Councilor Felix Arroyo Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

Councilor Felix Arroyo responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: This past summer’s vote on the FY08 City budget. The approved budget did not include the requested $8 million for youth opportunity programming (summer jobs, year-round jobs, after-school programs and youth/street workers). In a $2 billion budget, I find it extremely disappointing that we could not work together to better prioritize funding to include this minimal request from a coalition of youth and youth workers. Voting on the budget annually is our biggest decision of the year and, if three other Councilors had joined the four of us in voting against the budget, we could have negotiated for this youth programming and to better meet other top priorities. We must work more diligently to pass City budgets that meet current priorities to the limit of current revenue.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: I have proposed the creation of a City Planning Department and elected Planning Board which would require substantial changes to Article 80 and the large development review process. In addition, I have supported and will continue to support changes to improve community process, to encourage environmentally-friendly building practices, and to maintain open space. In general, Article 80 needs to be looked at comprehensively to ensure that reforms are implanted that broaden and strengthen community-based planning for houses, schools, and open space.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: "Family-friendly" housing must not only be truly affordable to working parents, it should be 3-5 bedroom housing, located near quality schools and recreation opportunities, and be free of common childhood hazards such as lead paint and faulty wiring. Most importantly, it must be quality housing at the same time it is affordable. I certainly would support and will strongly consider introducing a new Ordinance which would create a similar requirement in certain Boston neighborhoods (such as Brighton) where institutional expansion, overbuilding of luxury condominiums and other forces have driven out too many of our City’s working families.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: No. As a parent of five children who either attend or graduated from the public schools, I know firsthand that the current school choice system is far from perfect. However, there simply aren’t enough quality public schools in each neighborhood to fully serve the children of each neighborhood. With that reality, a move to a complete “neighborhood” school model would likely increase the achievement gap and set back our decades-long effort to truly integrate our public schools.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: I have proposed a University Expansion Moratorium which would condition all future expansion on the institutions paying full property taxes (in the form of a PILOT payment) and participating in a full community and City Council review. Though I’m not sure it would be legally permissible to require *all* undergraduate students to live on-campus, I support each effort to put whatever pressure is need on BC in order to encourage such a policy. I believe all undergraduates should be housed on the “Main Campus” while the St John’s Seminary land should be reserved for open space, administrative buildings (along Commonwealth Avenue only) and, if necessary, graduate student housing.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: I’ve never used either version personally. I do think that the Mayor’s line can act as a good central number and referral service. However, I strongly support a move to a 311 system which would provide an easily recognizable number (311!) for all non-emergency service calls. I met with the Mayor of Somerville recently about their 311 system and it also includes the advantage of immediate service by those answering that line. Callers should never be forwarded to other individuals and Boston’s service line (like Somerville’s) should include trained individuals who can either immediately solve your problem or solve it personally and then call the caller back to report “problem solved.”
   
   

John Connolly Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

John Connolly responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: As a former teacher of at-risk youth, I know the importance of providing job opportunities to young people and proactively engaging them in their communities. I support increased funding for the Summer Jobs Program and for violence prevention and intervention programs. I would have worked to include such funding in the 2007 Operating Budget and one of my top priorities will be to restore such funding in future budgets.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: Article 80, which governs most development projects in the city including Institutional Master Plans, does not provide sufficient time for communities to comment on proposals submitted by developers and institutions. Presently, the maximum time for a community to respond to even the most complex of proposals is 75 days. As we saw with the recent Harvard Science Complex, communities need more time to review and comment on such proposals and to receive adequate responses to their concerns. I believe that the timelines under Article 80 should be extended.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: I am running for City Council because I am committed to making Boston a family-friendly city again, which means adequate and affordable housing, quality public schools, and safe streets. I was born and raised in Boston and my wife Meg and I are going to raise our family here, so I know the importance of these factors in attracting and sustaining families. Among the ways that we can make housing more family-friendly is by persuading developers to build more three and four bedroom units, by encouraging developers to incorporate child-care centers into their new buildings, and encouraging the expansion of public spaces throughout the city.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: As a former teacher of at-risk youth, I know the importance of parental involvement in a child’s education. One way to support greater parental involvement is by sending our children to school in the communities in which they live. Neighborhood schools build greater cohesion within a community as students and parents share experiences and collaborate with other families from their neighborhood. Neighborhood schools also reduce burdensome and costly commutes and make more resources available to ensure that all of our schools are of the highest quality, which is ultimately the best way for us to reduce the achievement gap.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: Boston College should provide on-campus housing on its main campus for all of its undergraduate students. Undergraduate students should not be housed on the former Archdiocese property. Moving students on-campus will make more housing available in the community for families and will reduce the artificially high rental market, which is inflated by the presence of students who are willing to pay exorbitant rents and to crowd into unsuitable space.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: The Mayor’s 24-Hour Constituent Hotline is a valuable tool for delivering constituent services. I also support the development and implementation of a 311 system whereby residents call one number (311) to acquire information, inquire about services, report problems, and track the status of issues. 311 operators are highly trained and knowledgeable about every aspect of city services and act as a one-stop resource. I also support the development and implementation of a "stat tracking" system to track the nature of the calls received and the responsiveness of the city. Keeping track of this information will help the city anticipate future needs and provide better services.
   
   

Councilor Michael Flaherty Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

Councilor Michael Flaherty responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: In 2004, the City Council decided to extend the expiration date for urban renewal areas in Boston for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA). Looking back, it was probably a real opportunity for the Council to dilute some of the power of the BRA and create a separate, independent planning agency. I regret that the Council did not seize that chance to finally bring some balance back to the City’s planning and redevelopment initiatives.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: I support having a clearly defined process that legitimately allows for the public to participate in the review process for all proposed real estate development projects. However, I believe that process should be consistently employed and have a finite start and end, something that I think the current process – under Article 80 – lacks. Too many times, I have seen proposed projects languish indefinitely, with its lengthy and ambiguous review process wearing down all parties, especially the public. Not only does this frustrate the public and developers, it results in costly delays. We need to refine Article 80 in a way that strikes a balance between providing appropriate opportunities for public review and at the same time, keeping to some kind of sensible, cost-efficient timeline.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: As a parent trying to raise a family in the city, I have a personal and professional interest in making Boston a place to raise families. That’s why I have consistently called upon developers to increase their supply of senior efficient units, as well as three-bedroom units. In addition, I believe our city should be crafting a housing program that links affordable housing to opportunity. We can do this through sound housing policy that places affordable housing units in areas of vast opportunities for advancement, whether it’s in employment, education, financial wealth, or family self-sufficiency. Affordable housing units that are deliberately located in a place that is convenient to high performing schools, prolonged employment opportunities, reliable public transportation, and quality child care facilities will certainly open the doors to new opportunities for advancement and make it possible for families to stay in Boston.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: As a parent with three children in the Boston Public Schools, I have a vested interest in strengthening our public school system. By calling for smaller classroom sizes, extended school days and an increased supply of quality educational resources for each student, I have consistently supported measures to close the achievement gap. I intend to keep pushing for a school system that has the confidence of every parent from every Boston neighborhood. I wholeheartedly understand the concerns of parents who want to send their children to their neighborhood schools and agree that more parent-student AND parent-teacher time plays a valuable role in student’s academic success. Furthermore, I cannot overlook the fact that the tens of millions of dollars currently spent on transportation could be significant money invested in improving our most vulnerable schools. Nevertheless, I think it is unrealistic and socially reckless to go to 100% neighborhood schools overnight. Changing the structure of our school assignment process is an enormous undertaking that necessitates serious discussion and careful thought. Should we consider any proposal to change the school assignment process, we must be directed by the goal to assure ALL Boston students of a quality public education. I will work hard to facilitate productive and responsible dialogue on this issue by bringing together all stakeholders: educators, parents, policy experts, city and community leaders.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: I have been a long-term proponent of having our local colleges and universities build more student campus housing as a way to free up the supply of available rental units and keep rental prices at affordable prices for the area’s working families. However, at the same time we encourage our academic institutions to create more on-campus housing options for students, we must also promote and encourage them to develop and/or expand in a responsible manner that respects the interests of the neighborhood residents.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: The city has an obligation to responsibly and efficiently meet the needs of constituents. However, I am unsure that the 24-hour hotline is the appropriate tool as it lacks the ability to track constituents’ requests. That is why we need CitiStat, which is a government accountability program that I called for in 2004. CitiStat enables every request to be tracked so that the city – and its residents (by phone or internet) – can comprehend how quickly and adequately requests are addressed.
   
   

Matthew Geary Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

Matthew Geary responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: Specifically, I would like to have seen approval for the democratic home rule petition, voting rights to all permanent residents, and collective bargaining for tenants. Additionally, the budgets that have been passed have been a glaring example of how misplaced the priorities of the city are. Funding for necessary services has been slashed, working people have continued to have seen their quality of life deteriorate as costs of living have skyrocketed. I would not approve and actively campaign against any budget cuts to social services, education, housing assistance and jobs programs which must be fully funded.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: The review process is constantly being stepped over and neglects the needs of neighborhoods. Specifically, the ability of the BRA to waive neighborhood review, based on its own determination is a serious problem. The process of development needs to be fully transparent, with full disclosure of all impacts and disclosure of the full development plans. Developers should not have the ability to negotiate privately with the BRA, disregarding the desires of the community. The city should not be making vague promises that it will make sure the neighborhoods concerns will be addressed after approval, it should be empowering the process of meeting the communities development needs.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: Boston needs a concrete plan to build affordable housing, and not just depend on what the city might be able to get out of developers. A democratically run Boston Redevelopment Authority would respond to the needs of working people in Boston and build the type of affordable housing that is needed. Developers currently choose projects based on what makes them the most profit, since the city has no independent planning all they can do is say they will try to make the proposed plans to respond to local needs. Neighborhoods should be making the decisions, telling the city what types of development are needed, not just hoping for a 25% influence.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: With an unaccountable, unelected school board it is no surprise that BPS schools have widely differing success rates. Boston needs a democratic, fully funded educational system, this would go much further to giving kids the opportunities they deserve then simply tweaking a dysfunctional system. As the war in Iraq continues, costing the city approximately $1,000,000,000 that could have transformed the BPS, I will continue in campaigning to make our schools no-recruiting zones for the military.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: Having affordable rental housing shouldn't be something that working people and students have to fight over, the city should be building enough to meet our needs. Freshmen often make their new away-from-home experience a burden for the community, it belongs on campus. The new land purchase by BC is one way to mitigate the impact of students, however, the fact that BC doesn't pay property taxes, means the bill for city services is being picked up by working people. The city must require the universities to disclose all land owned through shell companies, pay their fair share and live up to their past commitments.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: I have used the hotline, and while new channels of communication are important, they are not sufficient in creating open, democratic, collective responses. Councilors are elected to respond to the people's needs and I have been a participant and organizer in past campaigns to improve city services, defend union rights and stop the "T" fare increases. By sponsoring hearings and drawing the city's attention the to needs of working people, I will go beyond the partial solution of a "hotline service" and be an tangible advocate.
   
   

Martin Hogan Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

Martin Hogan responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: I have been a strong supporter of many of the initiatives of the council however in the recent few years I have been struggling with quite a few. I feel that wasting precious time and resources on the discussion of “Cup Condoms” or the banning of plastic bags has been of little or no use to the city and the resident as a whole. Specifically, I have been a strong and vigilant supporter of immigration reform. In 2006 the Boston City Council passed a resolution banning Boston police Officers from arresting ILLEGAL Immigrants as a crime against the city and the state as a whole. I feel that we need to make sure that all residents of the city are here legally and aide by the laws that were set up to protect all residents of our city, state, and country. A crime is a crime and we are not setting the right example for our children, our future.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: I feel that making changes relevant to Article 80 of the zoning code is narrowing our scope too small. The problem with our city and the way the ZBA and the BRA affect us is in the fact that our city council, which are there to represent the residents and neighborhoods of the city, has no binding power over either entity or the way in which they choose to redevelop/destroy our lands. I feel that the only way to combat this is for the council to, with new direction and resolve, work together and with the state legislature to eliminate the current authority and restructure a new one under city control.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: I feel that we need to help keep the families that have strived and worked hard throughout the generations and embrace new and forming families that may move into our neighborhoods. However, I want to make sure that it is affordable for all residents and in doing so making sure that all have the right and ability to choose which neighborhood out of our many diverse areas in which they would like to call home. I do not feel that setting aside specific “family friendly” lands will help us accomplish this. I feel that this will only lead to more economic segregation and will drive a wedge between our residents. I believe we need to advocate more for affordable housing both for low and median level residents and strive to make sure our neighborhoods are safe and well kept so that the flight of the Boston resident does not continue.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: I have always believed that the power of the government for the City of Boston belongs in the hands of its residents. That includes voting for your best representative at city hall and it includes schooling. While I strongly believe in neighborhood schools, I believe it is up to each parent to decide where to send their child for the best possible education. As parents, you deserve to choose to keep your child close to home or if a school has better opportunities such as vocational training or special education, across the city, you can choose that option.  We do not need to bus children all over the city on nearly empty buses wasting precious time, money and resources.  We should not be worrying about rich schools versus poor schools. We need every school to be well funded and held to the highest standards for safety and quality education. We need more parental involvement, attention and resources for each child to close the achievement gap and give them the opportunities to succeed.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: I feel that we need to have each college and university in Boston, like Boston College, re-evaluate their capacity for housing students on campus and what their percentage is that live off campus. We need to advocate to control how much the institution can expand and specifically where. We need to preserve the neighborhoods and public lands and resources we have and make sure that the safety of all, residents and students is provided. One of the ways we can help to make sure that families are not forced out is by defining where and how much these institutions may expand. Also I will work every day to get these institutions and other tax exempt entities in Boston pay their fair share of the burden.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: Yes, I have used the Mayor’s Hotline, and I can say that I feel the system is not benefiting the residents of the city. I would propose as your at large city councilor that we try to fix this system in two ways. First, I want to create local city halls in each neighborhood of the city, where our residents can access the needed city services anytime during the week and on Saturdays when many have free time from work. Secondly, I will personally, as your city councilor, have open office hours throughout the city, in each neighborhood where you will actually be able to access the council. I am running to bridge the gap between our neighborhoods and our city hall for each and every resident of our city.
   
   

Councilor Sam Yoon Responds to the Brighton Centered Questionnaire

Councilor Sam Yoon responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large.

1. QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?
   
   RESPONSE: Although I was not on the Council at the time of this vote, I am certainly aware of the impacts of the decision by the City Council to approve extensions for the Urban Renewal plans and thus giving up oversight from the City Council. This vote decreased the accountability that the Boston Redevelopment Authority had to the City Council around development decisions in much of the city. This is certainly the City Council decision I would most like to reverse in the last 5 years.
   
   
2. QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?
   
   RESPONSE: The Article 80 process, while well intentioned, is limited as the process which gives the community a voice in development. I would like to see the current Article 80 process improved. Right now residents can comment on a project but that is as far as it goes, there is nothing that requires the developer to listen to the community. Additionally, there is very little accountability for ensuring that developers keep promises made to the community during this process. A perfect example of this is Harvard’s Science Complex. While this project went through a complete Article 80 process it was clear to me that the concerns of the community were not addressed.
   
   There need to be incentives to encourage or require developers and the BRA to take a more serious look at the concerns of the community. As someone who worked in community development in Chinatown I understand the importance of building trust between the developers and the community so that the development reflects a shared vision for the neighborhood. This is something that has yet to happen in Allston/Brighton, and without a way to hold a developer accountable to the community, it will be a very difficult task.
   
   
3. QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?
   
   RESPONSE: I am very impressed with the initiative that the city of Vancouver is taking around family-friendly housing. Developing workforce housing for families is a challenge for every major city. As chair of the Housing Committee for the City Council, I know it is a challenge to get developers to build family housing as the space that would be used for a 3rd or 4th bedroom could be used to build another unit – therefore more profitable for the builder. I have two young children myself so I understand the needs of a growing family. My vision of family friendly housing revolves around three key pillars: space, public amenities and affordability.
   
   You cannot raise a family in a one-bedroom condominium or a studio apartment and I constantly hear from families in Boston struggling to find appropriate housing. The City must find ways to encourage developers to build units with multiple bedrooms and more square-footage. Developers need to contribute more to enhancing public spaces. One reason families are moving downtown in Vancouver is the close proximity of everything to where they live. Everything from parks to grocery stores to daycare centers and schools is within walking distance of the family’s home. Finally we need to look at the affordability of living downtown. Again, as a father of two young children I realize the expenses that come with having a young family. Right now housing is too expensive for people all over Boston, not just families. One of the issues I ran on in 2005 and I have worked on during my two years in office is increasing the affordability of housing for all residents of Boston regardless of the neighborhood.
   
   As it pertains to Boston I would support such a measure. I would like to see more of the students who attend college in Boston stay and raise a family here. This could mean promoting family friendly housing downtown. I would be supportive of learning more about Vancouver’s initiative and how it would work in Boston.
   
   
4. QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  
   
   RESPONSE: I support the movement toward community and neighborhood schools so long as a every school aged child in every neighborhood has access to a quality school. In schools all across the city, I am seeing families, parents and the community invest energy, volunteer time and interest in their neighborhood school. Education quality and school pride are vastly increased by this investment. I am working to find ways to support parents who want to become active in their child’s school, by increasing the number of Family Community Outreach Coordinators (FCOC’s) and pushing for paid leave time for working parents to visit at their child’s school. Unfortunately, not all schools are functioning at the level or achieving the results we seek for our children and so we have work to do before implementing an overhaul of our school assignment plan based on strictly walk-to schools.
   
   
5. QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?  
   
   RESPONSE: As for the students who live off-campus, and you will always have some, I believe we should work on developing relationships between the community and Boston College. While Boston College students may be students of the university, they are also residents of the neighborhood and need to behave as such. Mission Hill, which is home to Northeastern University has worked for years to cultivate this relationship. While it is not perfect, Northeastern University’s town-grown relationship is years ahead of Boston College. There needs to be clearly defined expectations of students that are drawn up between the college and the community (including D-14) and clear consequences for those students who do not meet the expectations.
   
   
6. QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?  
   
   RESPONSE: I use the Mayor’s 24-Hour hotline frequently, and like the Article 80 process mentioned above, it is a good idea that needs improvement. Last year I had the opportunity to tour the 311 call center in Somerville and I was amazed. Unlike Boston’s hotline, in Somerville there is a state-of-the-art, centralized accountability system. Callers can track their requests from the time they are made to the time of completion using modern customer service technology developed from the private sector. All of this information is open and available to anybody with the internet. I believe that residents should have direct access to their city government, especially when it comes to concrete quality of life issues. The mayor’s hotline is not utilized nearly as much as it could, but wholesale improvements would have to be made before its potential is fully realized.
   
   

Reversing a City Council Decision: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: If you could reverse one decision made by the City Council in the last five years, what would it be and why?

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: This past summer’s vote on the FY08 City budget. The approved budget did not include the requested $8 million for youth opportunity programming (summer jobs, year-round jobs, after-school programs and youth/street workers). In a $2 billion budget, I find it extremely disappointing that we could not work together to better prioritize funding to include this minimal request from a coalition of youth and youth workers. Voting on the budget annually is our biggest decision of the year and, if three other Councilors had joined the four of us in voting against the budget, we could have negotiated for this youth programming and to better meet other top priorities. We must work more diligently to pass City budgets that meet current priorities to the limit of current revenue.

JOHN CONNOLLY: As a former teacher of at-risk youth, I know the importance of providing job opportunities to young people and proactively engaging them in their communities. I support increased funding for the Summer Jobs Program and for violence prevention and intervention programs. I would have worked to include such funding in the 2007 Operating Budget and one of my top priorities will be to restore such funding in future budgets.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: In 2004, the City Council decided to extend the expiration date for urban renewal areas in Boston for the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA). Looking back, it was probably a real opportunity for the Council to dilute some of the power of the BRA and create a separate, independent planning agency. I regret that the Council did not seize that chance to finally bring some balance back to the City’s planning and redevelopment initiatives.

MATTHEW GEARY: Specifically, I would like to have seen approval for the democratic home rule petition, voting rights to all permanent residents, and collective bargaining for tenants. Additionally, the budgets that have been passed have been a glaring example of how misplaced the priorities of the city are. Funding for necessary services has been slashed, working people have continued to have seen their quality of life deteriorate as costs of living have skyrocketed. I would not approve and actively campaign against any budget cuts to social services, education, housing assistance and jobs programs which must be fully funded.

MARTIN HOGAN: I have been a strong supporter of many of the initiatives of the council however in the recent few years I have been struggling with quite a few. I feel that wasting precious time and resources on the discussion of “Cup Condoms” or the banning of plastic bags has been of little or no use to the city and the resident as a whole. Specifically, I have been a strong and vigilant supporter of immigration reform. In 2006 the Boston City Council passed a resolution banning Boston police Officers from arresting ILLEGAL Immigrants as a crime against the city and the state as a whole. I feel that we need to make sure that all residents of the city are here legally and aide by the laws that were set up to protect all residents of our city, state, and country. A crime is a crime and we are not setting the right example for our children, our future.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: Although I was not on the Council at the time of this vote, I am certainly aware of the impacts of the decision by the City Council to approve extensions for the Urban Renewal plans and thus giving up oversight from the City Council. This vote decreased the accountability that the Boston Redevelopment Authority had to the City Council around development decisions in much of the city. This is certainly the City Council decision I would most like to reverse in the last 5 years.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Changes to Article 80: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: What specific changes do you think should be made to Article 80 of the zoning code?

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: I have proposed the creation of a City Planning Department and elected Planning Board which would require substantial changes to Article 80 and the large development review process. In addition, I have supported and will continue to support changes to improve community process, to encourage environmentally-friendly building practices, and to maintain open space. In general, Article 80 needs to be looked at comprehensively to ensure that reforms are implanted that broaden and strengthen community-based planning for houses, schools, and open space.

JOHN CONNOLLY: Article 80, which governs most development projects in the city including Institutional Master Plans, does not provide sufficient time for communities to comment on proposals submitted by developers and institutions. Presently, the maximum time for a community to respond to even the most complex of proposals is 75 days. As we saw with the recent Harvard Science Complex, communities need more time to review and comment on such proposals and to receive adequate responses to their concerns. I believe that the timelines under Article 80 should be extended.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: I support having a clearly defined process that legitimately allows for the public to participate in the review process for all proposed real estate development projects. However, I believe that process should be consistently employed and have a finite start and end, something that I think the current process – under Article 80 – lacks. Too many times, I have seen proposed projects languish indefinitely, with its lengthy and ambiguous review process wearing down all parties, especially the public. Not only does this frustrate the public and developers, it results in costly delays. We need to refine Article 80 in a way that strikes a balance between providing appropriate opportunities for public review and at the same time, keeping to some kind of sensible, cost-efficient timeline.

MATTHEW GEARY: The review process is constantly being stepped over and neglects the needs of neighborhoods. Specifically, the ability of the BRA to waive neighborhood review, based on its own determination is a serious problem. The process of development needs to be fully transparent, with full disclosure of all impacts and disclosure of the full development plans. Developers should not have the ability to negotiate privately with the BRA, disregarding the desires of the community. The city should not be making vague promises that it will make sure the neighborhoods concerns will be addressed after approval, it should be empowering the process of meeting the communities development needs.

MARTIN HOGAN: I feel that making changes relevant to Article 80 of the zoning code is narrowing our scope too small. The problem with our city and the way the ZBA and the BRA affect us is in the fact that our city council, which are there to represent the residents and neighborhoods of the city, has no binding power over either entity or the way in which they choose to redevelop/destroy our lands. I feel that the only way to combat this is for the council to, with new direction and resolve, work together and with the state legislature to eliminate the current authority and restructure a new one under city control.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: The Article 80 process, while well intentioned, is limited as the process which gives the community a voice in development. I would like to see the current Article 80 process improved. Right now residents can comment on a project but that is as far as it goes, there is nothing that requires the developer to listen to the community. Additionally, there is very little accountability for ensuring that developers keep promises made to the community during this process. A perfect example of this is Harvard’s Science Complex. While this project went through a complete Article 80 process it was clear to me that the concerns of the community were not addressed.

There need to be incentives to encourage or require developers and the BRA to take a more serious look at the concerns of the community. As someone who worked in community development in Chinatown I understand the importance of building trust between the developers and the community so that the development reflects a shared vision for the neighborhood. This is something that has yet to happen in Allston/Brighton, and without a way to hold a developer accountable to the community, it will be a very difficult task.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Family-Friendly Housing: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: Vancouver, British Columbia, requires 25% of their new housing stock built downtown to be “family-friendly.” What is your vision of the specific design elements that would make housing “family-friendly,” and should Boston adopt a similar requirement?

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: "Family-friendly" housing must not only be truly affordable to working parents, it should be 3-5 bedroom housing, located near quality schools and recreation opportunities, and be free of common childhood hazards such as lead paint and faulty wiring. Most importantly, it must be quality housing at the same time it is affordable. I certainly would support and will strongly consider introducing a new Ordinance which would create a similar requirement in certain Boston neighborhoods (such as Brighton) where institutional expansion, overbuilding of luxury condominiums and other forces have driven out too many of our City’s working families.

JOHN CONNOLLY: I am running for City Council because I am committed to making Boston a family-friendly city again, which means adequate and affordable housing, quality public schools, and safe streets. I was born and raised in Boston and my wife Meg and I are going to raise our family here, so I know the importance of these factors in attracting and sustaining families. Among the ways that we can make housing more family-friendly is by persuading developers to build more three and four bedroom units, by encouraging developers to incorporate child-care centers into their new buildings, and encouraging the expansion of public spaces throughout the city.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: As a parent trying to raise a family in the city, I have a personal and professional interest in making Boston a place to raise families. That’s why I have consistently called upon developers to increase their supply of senior efficient units, as well as three-bedroom units. In addition, I believe our city should be crafting a housing program that links affordable housing to opportunity. We can do this through sound housing policy that places affordable housing units in areas of vast opportunities for advancement, whether it’s in employment, education, financial wealth, or family self-sufficiency. Affordable housing units that are deliberately located in a place that is convenient to high performing schools, prolonged employment opportunities, reliable public transportation, and quality child care facilities will certainly open the doors to new opportunities for advancement and make it possible for families to stay in Boston.

MATTHEW GEARY: Boston needs a concrete plan to build affordable housing, and not just depend on what the city might be able to get out of developers. A democratically run Boston Redevelopment Authority would respond to the needs of working people in Boston and build the type of affordable housing that is needed. Developers currently choose projects based on what makes them the most profit, since the city has no independent planning all they can do is say they will try to make the proposed plans to respond to local needs. Neighborhoods should be making the decisions, telling the city what types of development are needed, not just hoping for a 25% influence.

MARTIN HOGAN: I feel that we need to help keep the families that have strived and worked hard throughout the generations and embrace new and forming families that may move into our neighborhoods. However, I want to make sure that it is affordable for all residents and in doing so making sure that all have the right and ability to choose which neighborhood out of our many diverse areas in which they would like to call home. I do not feel that setting aside specific “family friendly” lands will help us accomplish this. I feel that this will only lead to more economic segregation and will drive a wedge between our residents. I believe we need to advocate more for affordable housing both for low and median level residents and strive to make sure our neighborhoods are safe and well kept so that the flight of the Boston resident does not continue.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: I am very impressed with the initiative that the city of Vancouver is taking around family-friendly housing. Developing workforce housing for families is a challenge for every major city. As chair of the Housing Committee for the City Council, I know it is a challenge to get developers to build family housing as the space that would be used for a 3rd or 4th bedroom could be used to build another unit – therefore more profitable for the builder. I have two young children myself so I understand the needs of a growing family. My vision of family friendly housing revolves around three key pillars: space, public amenities and affordability.

You cannot raise a family in a one-bedroom condominium or a studio apartment and I constantly hear from families in Boston struggling to find appropriate housing. The City must find ways to encourage developers to build units with multiple bedrooms and more square-footage. Developers need to contribute more to enhancing public spaces. One reason families are moving downtown in Vancouver is the close proximity of everything to where they live. Everything from parks to grocery stores to daycare centers and schools is within walking distance of the family’s home. Finally we need to look at the affordability of living downtown. Again, as a father of two young children I realize the expenses that come with having a young family. Right now housing is too expensive for people all over Boston, not just families. One of the issues I ran on in 2005 and I have worked on during my two years in office is increasing the affordability of housing for all residents of Boston regardless of the neighborhood.

As it pertains to Boston I would support such a measure. I would like to see more of the students who attend college in Boston stay and raise a family here. This could mean promoting family friendly housing downtown. I would be supportive of learning more about Vancouver’s initiative and how it would work in Boston.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Neighborhood Schools and the Achievement Gap: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: Some people have proposed that the BPS return to “neighborhood” or “community” schools. Do you support such a proposal? How would such a move impact the achievement gap?  

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: No. As a parent of five children who either attend or graduated from the public schools, I know firsthand that the current school choice system is far from perfect. However, there simply aren’t enough quality public schools in each neighborhood to fully serve the children of each neighborhood. With that reality, a move to a complete “neighborhood” school model would likely increase the achievement gap and set back our decades-long effort to truly integrate our public schools.

JOHN CONNOLLY: As a former teacher of at-risk youth, I know the importance of parental involvement in a child’s education. One way to support greater parental involvement is by sending our children to school in the communities in which they live. Neighborhood schools build greater cohesion within a community as students and parents share experiences and collaborate with other families from their neighborhood. Neighborhood schools also reduce burdensome and costly commutes and make more resources available to ensure that all of our schools are of the highest quality, which is ultimately the best way for us to reduce the achievement gap.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: As a parent with three children in the Boston Public Schools, I have a vested interest in strengthening our public school system. By calling for smaller classroom sizes, extended school days and an increased supply of quality educational resources for each student, I have consistently supported measures to close the achievement gap. I intend to keep pushing for a school system that has the confidence of every parent from every Boston neighborhood. I wholeheartedly understand the concerns of parents who want to send their children to their neighborhood schools and agree that more parent-student AND parent-teacher time plays a valuable role in student’s academic success. Furthermore, I cannot overlook the fact that the tens of millions of dollars currently spent on transportation could be significant money invested in improving our most vulnerable schools. Nevertheless, I think it is unrealistic and socially reckless to go to 100% neighborhood schools overnight. Changing the structure of our school assignment process is an enormous undertaking that necessitates serious discussion and careful thought. Should we consider any proposal to change the school assignment process, we must be directed by the goal to assure ALL Boston students of a quality public education. I will work hard to facilitate productive and responsible dialogue on this issue by bringing together all stakeholders: educators, parents, policy experts, city and community leaders.

MATTHEW GEARY: With an unaccountable, unelected school board it is no surprise that BPS schools have widely differing success rates. Boston needs a democratic, fully funded educational system, this would go much further to giving kids the opportunities they deserve then simply tweaking a dysfunctional system. As the war in Iraq continues, costing the city approximately $1,000,000,000 that could have transformed the BPS, I will continue in campaigning to make our schools no-recruiting zones for the military.

MARTIN HOGAN: I have always believed that the power of the government for the City of Boston belongs in the hands of its residents. That includes voting for your best representative at city hall and it includes schooling. While I strongly believe in neighborhood schools, I believe it is up to each parent to decide where to send their child for the best possible education. As parents, you deserve to choose to keep your child close to home or if a school has better opportunities such as vocational training or special education, across the city, you can choose that option.  We do not need to bus children all over the city on nearly empty buses wasting precious time, money and resources.  We should not be worrying about rich schools versus poor schools. We need every school to be well funded and held to the highest standards for safety and quality education. We need more parental involvement, attention and resources for each child to close the achievement gap and give them the opportunities to succeed.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: I support the movement toward community and neighborhood schools so long as a every school aged child in every neighborhood has access to a quality school. In schools all across the city, I am seeing families, parents and the community invest energy, volunteer time and interest in their neighborhood school. Education quality and school pride are vastly increased by this investment. I am working to find ways to support parents who want to become active in their child’s school, by increasing the number of Family Community Outreach Coordinators (FCOC’s) and pushing for paid leave time for working parents to visit at their child’s school. Unfortunately, not all schools are functioning at the level or achieving the results we seek for our children and so we have work to do before implementing an overhaul of our school assignment plan based on strictly walk-to schools.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Boston College Undergraduate Dorms: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: Should Boston College be required to house all of their undergraduate students in on-campus dormitories? If so, where should the dormitories be located? On their 'Brighton Campus' (land recently purchased from the Archdiocese of Boston), on their 'Main Campus,' or both?

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: I have proposed a University Expansion Moratorium which would condition all future expansion on the institutions paying full property taxes (in the form of a PILOT payment) and participating in a full community and City Council review. Though I’m not sure it would be legally permissible to require *all* undergraduate students to live on-campus, I support each effort to put whatever pressure is need on BC in order to encourage such a policy. I believe all undergraduates should be housed on the “Main Campus” while the St John’s Seminary land should be reserved for open space, administrative buildings (along Commonwealth Avenue only) and, if necessary, graduate student housing.

JOHN CONNOLLY: Boston College should provide on-campus housing on its main campus for all of its undergraduate students. Undergraduate students should not be housed on the former Archdiocese property. Moving students on-campus will make more housing available in the community for families and will reduce the artificially high rental market, which is inflated by the presence of students who are willing to pay exorbitant rents and to crowd into unsuitable space.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: I have been a long-term proponent of having our local colleges and universities build more student campus housing as a way to free up the supply of available rental units and keep rental prices at affordable prices for the area’s working families. However, at the same time we encourage our academic institutions to create more on-campus housing options for students, we must also promote and encourage them to develop and/or expand in a responsible manner that respects the interests of the neighborhood residents.

MATTHEW GEARY: Having affordable rental housing shouldn't be something that working people and students have to fight over, the city should be building enough to meet our needs. Freshmen often make their new away-from-home experience a burden for the community, it belongs on campus. The new land purchase by BC is one way to mitigate the impact of students, however, the fact that BC doesn't pay property taxes, means the bill for city services is being picked up by working people. The city must require the universities to disclose all land owned through shell companies, pay their fair share and live up to their past commitments.

MARTIN HOGAN: I feel that we need to have each college and university in Boston, like Boston College, re-evaluate their capacity for housing students on campus and what their percentage is that live off campus. We need to advocate to control how much the institution can expand and specifically where. We need to preserve the neighborhoods and public lands and resources we have and make sure that the safety of all, residents and students is provided. One of the ways we can help to make sure that families are not forced out is by defining where and how much these institutions may expand. Also I will work every day to get these institutions and other tax exempt entities in Boston pay their fair share of the burden.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: As for the students who live off-campus, and you will always have some, I believe we should work on developing relationships between the community and Boston College. While Boston College students may be students of the university, they are also residents of the neighborhood and need to behave as such. Mission Hill, which is home to Northeastern University has worked for years to cultivate this relationship. While it is not perfect, Northeastern University’s town-grown relationship is years ahead of Boston College. There needs to be clearly defined expectations of students that are drawn up between the college and the community (including D-14) and clear consequences for those students who do not meet the expectations.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Constituent Service Hotline: Councilor-At-Large Candidates Respond to Questionnaire

Many of the candidates for the Boston City Councilor-At-Large seat responded to the Brighton Centered questionnaire. Here you can see all of their responses to one of those questions.

QUESTION: Have you ever used the Mayor's 24-Hour Constituent Service hotline, either the phone number or the online version? Is it an effective tool for delivering constituent services? What, if anything, would you change about it?

COUNCILOR FELIX ARROYO: I’ve never used either version personally. I do think that the Mayor’s line can act as a good central number and referral service. However, I strongly support a move to a 311 system which would provide an easily recognizable number (311!) for all non-emergency service calls. I met with the Mayor of Somerville recently about their 311 system and it also includes the advantage of immediate service by those answering that line. Callers should never be forwarded to other individuals and Boston’s service line (like Somerville’s) should include trained individuals who can either immediately solve your problem or solve it personally and then call the caller back to report “problem solved.”

JOHN CONNOLLY: The Mayor’s 24-Hour Constituent Hotline is a valuable tool for delivering constituent services. I also support the development and implementation of a 311 system whereby residents call one number (311) to acquire information, inquire about services, report problems, and track the status of issues. 311 operators are highly trained and knowledgeable about every aspect of city services and act as a one-stop resource. I also support the development and implementation of a "stat tracking" system to track the nature of the calls received and the responsiveness of the city. Keeping track of this information will help the city anticipate future needs and provide better services.

COUNCILOR MICHAEL FLAHERTY: The city has an obligation to responsibly and efficiently meet the needs of constituents. However, I am unsure that the 24-hour hotline is the appropriate tool as it lacks the ability to track constituents’ requests. That is why we need CitiStat, which is a government accountability program that I called for in 2004. CitiStat enables every request to be tracked so that the city – and its residents (by phone or internet) – can comprehend how quickly and adequately requests are addressed.

MATTHEW GEARY: I have used the hotline, and while new channels of communication are important, they are not sufficient in creating open, democratic, collective responses. Councilors are elected to respond to the people's needs and I have been a participant and organizer in past campaigns to improve city services, defend union rights and stop the "T" fare increases. By sponsoring hearings and drawing the city's attention the to needs of working people, I will go beyond the partial solution of a "hotline service" and be an tangible advocate.

MARTIN HOGAN: Yes, I have used the Mayor’s Hotline, and I can say that I feel the system is not benefiting the residents of the city. I would propose as your at large city councilor that we try to fix this system in two ways. First, I want to create local city halls in each neighborhood of the city, where our residents can access the needed city services anytime during the week and on Saturdays when many have free time from work. Secondly, I will personally, as your city councilor, have open office hours throughout the city, in each neighborhood where you will actually be able to access the council. I am running to bridge the gap between our neighborhoods and our city hall for each and every resident of our city.

COUNCILOR SAM YOON: I use the Mayor’s 24-Hour hotline frequently, and like the Article 80 process mentioned above, it is a good idea that needs improvement. Last year I had the opportunity to tour the 311 call center in Somerville and I was amazed. Unlike Boston’s hotline, in Somerville there is a state-of-the-art, centralized accountability system. Callers can track their requests from the time they are made to the time of completion using modern customer service technology developed from the private sector. All of this information is open and available to anybody with the internet. I believe that residents should have direct access to their city government, especially when it comes to concrete quality of life issues. The mayor’s hotline is not utilized nearly as much as it could, but wholesale improvements would have to be made before its potential is fully realized.

Candidate David Wyatt and Councilor Stephen Murphy did not respond to the questionnaire.

Another Crowdsourced Questionnaire -- But This One Is for Hillary, Mitt, and Barack

In August and September, here at the Brighton Centered Blog the online community "crowdsourced" a questionnaire for the six candidates for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat. Community members submitted questions, voted on the best questions, and then the candidates -- all six of them -- responded. It worked quite well. I stole the idea from another blogger here in town... but I can't say that I've heard about many other people creating political campaign questionnaires in the same communal manner.

Back in July, CNN and YouTube got together to run a Democratic presidential candidate's debate using questions submitted online, in video format, by ordinary people. CNN had an editorial board, however, picked out the questions that they used. Neat, although not fully crowdsourced because of the editorial board's selection of the final questions. (Fair enough criticism for me, too: I did a little bit of editorializing by picking the better 14 questions among those submitted, rewording and/or combining some questions, and then putting those 14 ones up for the vote.)

There is a new questionnaire being put together -- and it's on the national stage. 10Questions.com and Talking Points Memo (a high-quality political blog) are running a fully-crowdsourced questionnaire-in-the-form-of-ten-videos that are submitted by ordinary people online. You can submit your own video, and vote on everyone else's submitted videos. The top ten will be sent to the presidential candidates as a questionnaire, and they'll submit video responses. The online viewers can then vote if the candidates actually answered the questions.

It'll be a fun process to watch, although I think the last step in the process is liable to get ruined by campaign meddling.

After Action Review of Crowdsourced Questionnaire

WARNING!!! Shameless Self-Promotion! WARNING!!!

David S. Bernstein of The Boston Phoenix's "Talking Politics" has very nice words about the crowdsourced questionnaire for candidates to the A-B City Council seat that was put together here over the last month. Bernstein then lost all credibility by referring to Brighton Centered as "one of the best blogs in town."

For those who weren't following the process early-on, I picked up the idea for submitting questions and running a poll from Adam Gaffin of UniversalHub -- who pulled it off successfully with a questionnaire that Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley then answered. The term "crowdsourcing" was suggested by Dan Kennedy to describe Gaffin's process, based on a term that seems to have first appeared only in 2006. The concept of crowdsourcing has been applied retroactively to describe processes that have occurred centuries ago, such as the Longitude Prize.

I believe the crowdsourcing process worked well here in Allston-Brighton for a series of reasons. First, while daily readership of the Brighton Centered Blog may not be astronomical -- it is, after all, a blog mostly about local politics and neighborhood issues -- there are several active Google Groups full of members with similar interests that supplemented the daily readers. They sprouted up in response to Harvard's Allston expansion ("AllstonBrighton2006" and "Harvard Neighbors Forum") and Boston College's expansion into the former St. John's Seminary ("BC_Neighbors_Forum"). Yes, we can thank Harvard and BC for something. Second, another blogger in Allston who predates me, Harry Mattison, prepared the activist neighborhood at large on the concept of reading blogs and groups. Third, I got an advance agreement from most of the candidates that they would participate. Fourth, I reminded most of them about the questionnaire when the date approached. Fifth, as the deadline loomed I chased down the last candidate's questionnaire by contacting every phone, answering machine, pager, and email address I had for him/her. Sixth, the candidates seemed to realize that the questions were directly from the voters. It is far more difficult for a candidate to blow off the voters themselves than a two-bit blogger. And finally, I was asked to moderate the City Council candidates forum next week -- the last one before the preliminary election -- so the candidates probably all felt they had to be nice to me in the hopes of getting a softball question in return.

In response to Bernstein's concerns about not fact-checking the candidates' responses (which I originally noted on the final blog posting): I think the process followed here is parallel to the idea of having a voter information guide that many states publish in hardcopy and mail to all registered voters (Massachusetts does not), although the hardcopy aspect of the guide is probably becoming rare these days. Some states (or municipalities) have the candidates each give a brief biography and/or answer one general, but topical, question. I don't think the Secretaries of State fact-check those candidate answers or biographies; instead, they let the candidates deceive, mislead, or lie at their own risk. That's the same idea I adopted here by publishing their responses unedited.

Anyway, I hope it was an educational experience for everyone who watched and/or participated in the process!

Allston-Brighton District City Council Candidates Respond to the Crowdsourced Questionnaire

The candidates for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat have responded to the crowdsourced questionnaire generated by readers here of the Brighton Centered Blog and on the Google Groups AllstonBrighton2006 and BC_Neighbors_Forum. The questions were submitted by members of the public in mid-August; I selected the "best" 14, re-worded by me as necessary, and then put those to a vote in late-August; and the top seven vote-getters were sent to the candidates as a questionnaire on September 1. The final vote tallies can be seen at the Brighton Centered Blog by scrolling down on the right-hand-column of the webpage.

The instructions to the candidates were that they should submit responses by COB on Tuesday, September 11. All responses submitted by then would be posted at the same time, so no one could read another's responses in advance. No word limit was imposed, although I suggested:

"approximately a paragraph (2-4 sentences) in the response to each question, although some questions may naturally lead to a longer or shorter response."

All responses are published in their entirety without editing, although I have done a little bit of re-formatting (e.g., bullets) for consistency in layout. None of them have been fact-checked, either.

All six candidates submitted responses (click on their name to see their responses):

1. Alex Selvig
   
2. Mark Ciommo
3. Rosie Hanlon
4. Tim Schofield
5. Greg Glennon
6. James Jenner.
   

Thank you to everyone who submitted a question, voted on the poll, and/or responded to the questionnaire!!! I hope that everyone has found this process to be interesting, the questions to be important to our neighborhood, and the responses insightful for choosing your candidate for the preliminary election on September 25th.


EDIT (9/12/07): I have added an "After Action Review" discussing how effectively this online, crowdsourced process worked.

NOTE (9/17/07):  While I generally accepted (moderated) comments on this blog, I am not accepting comments on the individual candidate questionnaire responses.  Accepting such comments would be counter to the spirit of a level playing field and open to abuse.

Readers are still encouraged to post comments on other posts on Brighton Centered.