Mayor Menino Reopens School Assignment Process

In his State of the City Address this week, much of the attention has been focused on Mayor Thomas Menino's newfound effort to take on the firefighter's union in the ongoing collective bargaining negotiations.

Buried at the end of the Boston Globe article, however, was a nugget from a different topic altogether: the Mayor wants to revisit the school assignment process within the Boston Public Schools.

This is no small issue. School assignment was at the heart of the Boston busing wars of the 1970s that lead to federal court intervention in 1974 and a mandatory busing program in 1975. It is a charged issue, because reverting to "neighborhood schools" could potentially pit neighborhoods with better-performing schools against those with worse-performing schools


Current Three-Zone Model for School Assignment

Boston Public Schools is no longer under federal court oversight over its school assignment policy. In 2000, BPS modified its assignment program so that 50% of all seats in schools would be set aside in the first round of school assignment for students living within the walk-zone, which is a one-mile radius for elementary schools and one-and-a-half mile radius for middle schools. (High schools are all city-wide.)

The other 50% would be filled by a lottery within each of three school zones: North Zone (Allston-Brighton, Back Bay, Charlestown, downtown, and East Boston), East Zone (Hyde Park, Dorchester, Mattapan, and South Boston), and West Zone (Roxbury, Jamaica Plain, Roslindale, and West Roxbury). The zones were setup in 1988 and rolled out in 1989, as BPS was phasing out court-oversight, a way that ensured overall diversity in the school population within each zone, although there is substantial variation in, for example, ethnicity and economic status across each zone.



Since 2000, BPS has not used ethnicity in the school assignment process. The U.S. District Court ruled in 2003 that these three zones are no longer being used in order to provide racial balancing among them. The three-zone structure remains, however, and contains elongated zones that cause many children to have long bus rides. Trying to make those zones more compact in order to minimize bus usage and travel times is the point of the Mayor's initiative.


Six-Zone Models Examined in 2004

Back in 2004, the city tried revisiting the school assignment policy, but failed to come to a consensus on a plan. It is likely that many of the proposals put forward in 2004 will be raised again now in 2008, so it is worthwhile to take a look back at them.

The report of the Student Assignment Task Force on September 22, 2004 said:

Although the Task Force could not reach full consensus on the appropriate number and configuration of assignment zones, a majority of the group recommends that the current three-zone structure be replaced by a six-zone elementary and three-zone middle school structure, delineating a "primary" and "secondary" zone of school choices for every family.

The problems the task force found in the six-zone models, however, was more fundamental. There is an invisible vertical (actually north-northeast to south-southwest) line bisecting the city, where the schools on the western side outperform those on the eastern side in nearly all of the quality indicators they inspected. Three better performing zones result on the east, and three worse-performing schools on the west, in those six zone models. That invisible line is one key factor that led to the elongated structure of the three zones in the current model.

The task force preferred the idea where there were secondary zones matched to the first, with some choice allowed across those boundaries. It seems like the only way that equity could be achieved would be to pair primary and secondary zones that cross the vertical invisible line: Zones 1 and 3 are paired, 2 and 4, and 5 and 6:



In the six-zone model, Allston-Brighton has a "primary" zone 2 along with Fenway/Kenmore and Jamaica Plain; A-B's zone 2 is then paired up as having a "secondary" zone 4 consisting of Roxbury and South Dorchester.

These primary-secondary zone pairings create combined zone structures that look to me as every bit as unwieldly as the three-zone structure. Parents near Brighton Center may still have lots of schools to choose from, but their most distant options are now in South Dorchester instead of Charlestown or East Boston -- basically, just as far away. You might save a few bucks overall on gasoline for the buses, but it will only a few bucks because there will still be some very significant bus rides. The Globe story quotes the Mayor as wanting to cut up to $10 million from the $40 million (current) to $60 million (in five years) expenditures on busing.

The Mayor will find a hard time re-jiggering zones like these without creating newer, smaller zones that show increased disparity among them in the school performance indicators.


Walk Zone Preference and Neighborhood Schools

Modifying the walk zone preference percentage could very well be a another approach to school assignment reform also explored by the Mayor in his new initiative.

The School Committee has tweaked walk zone preference repeatedly over the last two decades. The 1990 K-12 rollout of the three-zone model increased walk zone preference from 50 to 75%. Variations of the walk zone preference were allowed to vary somewhat from school to school in 1996 based on changes to the waiting list policy, which resulted in some schools having 100% of students from the walk zone, i.e., a fully "neighborhood school" for those cases. The walk zone preference was reduced back to 50% in 2000, which is its present structure.

Back in October 2007, I posed a written question to the City Councilor-At-Large candidates regarding school choice:

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?

The answers, even pared down to those who won election, varied significantly. Councilor John Connolly gave clear support for the neighborhood school model. Councilor Sam Yoon gave his support for it only if "every school aged child in every neighborhood has access to a quality school", which he also said is a criterion not currently satisfied. Councilor Michael Flaherty appreciated the idea of community schools but considered it "unrealistic and socially reckless to go to 100% neighborhood schools overnight."

Best Wishes for Departing A-B TAB Reporter Rich Cherecwich

The reporter for the Allston-Brighton TAB, Rich Cherecwich, had his last day of work today for the newspaper.  He's off to Los Angeles -- driving the whole way, so hopefully he'll live some Route 66 stories himself.

He has been a rock solid reporter for the paper, consistently writing accurate and balanced stories covering all aspects of life in A-B.

Reporting for the A-B TAB is no easy job, since he has to write lots of stories every week.  I counted eight bylines in last week's newspaper, five in today's paper, and another one online today.  Maybe I missed something else?

I would like to express my best wishes to him on all of his future endeavors.

Stop by Rich's blog posting over at the A-B TAB to leave a comment!

BostonNOW Story on Language Used on BC Sports Fans Websites

The free daily, BostonNOW, has picked up the story, first reported here on the Brighton Centered Blog, of anti-Semitic and misogynistic comments posted on two online discussion boards devoted to Boston College athletics.

The BostonNOW story includes statements from Jack Dunn, Director of Public Affairs at BC, and Bobby Burton, editor-in-chief of one of the websites (rivals.com):

BC spokesman Jack Dunn said disciplinary actions will be taken against the posters if they are current members of the university's community. BC police is handling the investigation, he said, but would involve Boston police if necessary.

Rivals editor-in-chief said his company does the best it can to stay on top of the postings.

"We monitor and moderate the message boards and try to eliminate any items that violate the terms of service," Bobby Burton said.

He said he has not yet heard from any University officials about the matter.

"From a Rivals perspective, if there is anti-Semitic jargon, it would be grounds for dismissal from the site and it should be deleted," Burton said.

"Anything threatening, frankly."

The story does not, however, quote any official from scout.com, which is where the most inflammatory content was posted -- and where the BC discussion boards, Eagle Insider, have now been converted from free to paid subscriber-only status, along with a pledge to clean up the content.  The Eagle Insider board administrator stated yesterday that reporters had been "badgering" the scout.com Vice President.

Op-Ed in A-B TAB: House Undergraduates On-Campus Rather Than Banning Them From Living in 1- and 2-Family Houses

This week's edition of the Allston-Brighton TAB includes an op-ed piece written by me regarding Boston College's proposed institutional master plan.

In particular, I address BC's proposal to ban off-campus undergraduate students from living in 1- and 2-family houses in Allston-Brighton and part of Newton.

I argue that BC's proposed ban amounts to a Trojan Horse gift.  Accepting the present would bring with it the simulutaneous acceptance of the proposition that BC does not need to house all their undergraduates on-campus.  That would leave something like 600 undergraduate students living off-campus through the year 2018:

A far better idea, however, would be for BC to do the obvious: move all their undergraduates into on-campus dormitory housing. In this scenario, it would be unnecessary for BC to ban its undergraduates from living in one- and two-family houses, because they would already have moved out of those houses and into new dorms. As an added benefit, the students will be far more comfortable in on-campus dormitories than in an off-campus wooden horse.

Cassandra warned against accepting the Greek gift, but Apollo’s curse prevented the Trojans from believing her. “All heard, and none believed the prophecy,” wrote Virgil. We would do well to learn from Troy’s mistake by heeding Cassandra’s warning this time around — and pushing that horse back south of Commonwealth Avenue where it belongs.

Note that BC's proposed off-campus housing ban is not contained within the Institutional Master Plan Notification Form filed with the Boston Redevelopment Authority on December 5, 2007.  Instead, the proposed ban is something that BC officials have announced verbally at community meetings, and have pitched in meetings with editors and reporters at various media outlets, such as the Boston Globe and the Boston Herald.  (The ban would presumably be accomplished through a written agreement between BC and the BRA, as opposed to being part of the IMP itself.)

As a result of BC's pitch, the topic received a substantial amount of press in late December:  the Boston Herald reported the story (albeit without seeking contrary comment) and their editorial board endorsed the idea; the Boston Globe editorial board stated that the idea seemed a good one; and WBZ chimed in with a brief story.


Thanks to the editors of the TAB for publishing this piece.

Eagle Insider Discussion Board In Danger of Being Shutdown

The Eagle Insider discussion board, on which inflammatory anti-Semitic and misogynistic language has been posted recently targetting a Brighton community activist, is in danger of being shutdown.

Eagle Insider [EI] is a sports discussion board on issues related to Boston College athletics.  It is part of a larger website, mbd.scout.com, which has individual discussion boards for many different college athletics programs.  It is an independent website, not directly affiliated with any particular college or university.

Visitors and posters to the discussion boards are often alumni, students, or employees of the individual colleges or universities -- but certainly not exclusively so, since some may have no affiliation with the institution.  Since posters are generally anonymous, there is no corrobating evidence as to which category of affiliation they fall under.

The administrator of the Eagle Insider board posted a statement Thursday afternoon that the Vice President at scout.com has been "badger[ed]" today by reporters "demanding a response about the type of language" posted at the board.

The administrator further indicated that, for the moment, the Eagle Insider board will convert from a free to a paid-only website.  He also stated that he has been told to "clean up the board in the process."

The complete statement can be found below:

IMPORTANT: From the administrator [EagleChevy]

As you may have noticed, this forum is now premium [requiring paid access].  This board is in danger of being shut down permanently as several reporters have been badgering Scout's VPs demanding a response about the type of language and things posted here. Show your support for EI and Scout by subscribing, and show some deal of respect for the people who've worked and fought to make this forum what it is by thinking before you post.

I have a mandate from Scout to not only double subscriptions or be relieved of my duty as publisher but to clean up the board in the process. I can promise you my successor will not be as liberal with the moderation.

That is all.

Later in the afternoon, the changeover appears to have been made:  the board was no longer accessible to the general public.

Letter to BC Task Force: Traffic, Transportation, and Parking

At Wednesday night's meeting of the BC Task Force on the topic of traffic/transportation/parking in Boston College's Institutional Master Plan Notification Form, I presented the following letter to the task force for their consideration.

Much of the information in the letter grew out of a series of community meetings of the BC Neighbors Forum during 2007 which I facilitated. It is not a "position paper" (nor a public comment for the scoping determination) per se, but instead my attempt at summarizing the various concerns that were raised at those meetings -- and add a few more.



TO: Jeanne Woods, Chair, BC Task Force
DATE: January 16, 2008
RE: Traffic, Transportation, and Parking in Boston College's IMPNF

Dear Ms. Woods,

In this letter, I outline a series of issues needing discussion in the traffic, transportation, and parking proposals in Boston College's Institutional Master Plan Notification Form of December 5, 2007. Most of these issues have been raised by Brighton residents in previous meetings of the BC Neighbors Forum.

1. Need for Independent Peer Review of Traffic, Transportation, and Parking Studies (and Their Assumptions). Members of the public and the BC Task Force are neither experts nor engineers in the field of traffic and transportation. BC's traffic, transportation, and parking studies should therefore be subjected to an independent peer review in order to examine their assumptions, data, models, analysis, and conclusions.

Such peer review is standard practice in the field of traffic engineering. Allowing municipalities to charge for it is provided in state law (MGL 44, section 53G). Many neighboring municipalities charge developers for independent, third-party review (e.g., Somerville, Plymouth, Hopkinton, Salem, Winchester, Stoneham, etc.).

a)BC should pay the costs of the independent peer review (Harvard is already doing so through as part of their review with the Massachusetts Environmental Protection Act Office);
b)The BC Task Force, or another suitable community organization (such as the ABCDC), should act as both the fiscal agent and client for the peer review (this is already being done by the Citizens Advisory Committee in the Special Review Procedure for the Harvard case);
c)The peer review should examine the assumptions [see #6 below], data, models, analysis, and conclusions of BC's consultant's traffic study, including breaking down the traffic analysis by individual element [see #2 below];
d)The peer review should also examine errors in BC's 2000 traffic study, and certify that those errors have been corrected [see #5 below];
e)BC's consultants should share data in electronic format with the peer reviewer(s); and
f)The peer review should be conducted, and its results shared with the community, well in advance of BC submitting their next filing to the BRA (e.g., DPIR) so that the results can be studied and any remaining problems identified.

2. Traffic Analysis Should be Done for Individual Elements of Their Proposals. BC's traffic and transportation proposals for the intersection of Lake St and Comm Ave are:

a)Moving MBTA station. BC has proposed to move the MBTA station from its current location northwest of the intersection of Lake Street and Commonwealth Avenue to the center of Commonwealth Avenue east of Lake Street.
b)Creating new intersection east of Lake Street. BC has proposed to create a new intersection that crosses Commonwealth Avenue and the MBTA B line tracks at a location east of Lake Street (and east of the proposed new MBTA station).
c)Re-routing St. Thomas More Road. BC has proposed to re-route St. Thomas More Road, a city street on state-owned land, further to the east (to link up with the intersection in b) above).

The traffic and transportation impacts of these three elements must be analyzed both individually and in every possible combination in order to determine which elements improve the traffic flow – and which do not. Elements not contributing to traffic improvement should be removed from the IMP. For example, if moving the MBTA station all by itself creates all the improvement in the level-of-service (LOS) for the intersection of Lake Street and Commonwealth Avenue, then there is no public need to re-route St. Thomas More Road.

3. Stone Walls Along Commonwealth Avenue Should Not Be Removed to Provide Space for MBTA Center Platforms. If it is built, in order to provide for a wider center-platform MBTA station, the stone walls located along both the north and south sides of Commonwealth Avenue should not be modified from their current state. This may entail the trade-off of loss of a small number of on-street parking spaces along Commonwealth Avenue. Since BC is strongly advocating the new MBTA station, they should provide substitute parking spaces nearby.

4. MBTA Car Barn Land and/or Air Rights. BC and the MBTA should communicate to the neighborhood immediately if any kind of discussions have occurred regarding purchase and/or lease of land and/or air rights for the MBTA car barn parcel northeast of Lake St and Comm Ave.

5. Failures of the Traffic Assumptions, Models, and Analysis in BC's 2000 IMP Must be Fully Documented and Corrected. The traffic models in BC's approved IMP from the year 2000 contain the following information for the intersection of Lake Street and Commonwealth Avenue:

a)The intersection's actual "Level-of-Service" (LOS) in 2000 was rated a “C” overall (2000 IMP, App. B, Table 12);
b)The LOS no-build prediction for 2005 was a “D” (Table 14);
c)The LOS build prediction for 2005 was a a “D” (Table 24);
d)The LOS no-build prediction for 2010 was a “D” (Table 16); and
e)The LOS build prediction for 2010 was a “D” (Table 26).

As we know from BC's March 2007 presentation to the BC Task Force, the actual LOS for 2007 is “F” for this intersection. Note that the shrinkage of the Archdiocese of Boston, unanticipated in 2000, should have, if anything, decreased the traffic in that intersection; the opposite appears to have occurred.

The traffic assumptions, models, and/or analysis in BC's IMP of 2000 were therefore demonstrably flawed. These flaws must be identified, explained to the community, and corrected in their current traffic analysis. Their current traffic model must be capable of using the traffic data of 2000 in order to correctly predict the actual traffic data of 2007. I note that these glaring and systematic errors in their 2000 traffic study points to the need for independent peer review.

6. Assumptions for Traffic, Transportation, and Parking Must be Justified and/or Corrected. BC's 10-year master plan calls for an increase in their faculty of 100. Such an increase in the number of faculty usually bring an associated increase in the number of professional research staff, post-doctoral researchers and fellows, technicians, graduate students, secretaries, grant administrators, and the support staff (custodial, food service, stock rooms, etc.).

BC claims in their IMPNF that their increase of 100 faculty members would be accompanied by 342 new graduate students – but only an increase of 12 in all other categories of employees combined!!! (Table 6-3) Their 2000 IMP estimated an increase of 11 new faculty and 93 staff (2000 IMP, App. B, p.55). The ratio of increased faculty-to-staff has changed by a factor of 70 between 2000 and 2007!!! The 2007 numbers are highly suspect.
Jeanne Levesque, BC Director of Government Relations, has noted (private communication) that 23 of the 100 new faculty members will be in the natural sciences. These science faculty members will bring in a substantial number of new post-doctoral researchers, technicians, scientific staff, and so on.

Full disclosure of the ratio of faculty to all employees in BC's natural sciences departments (physics, biology, chemistry, etc.) should be required (it was requested verbally from BC), and the increase in total faculty, staff, and students should be independently reviewed.

Anecdotal evidence can be found at the website for some individual faculty members' labs, which indicate that there are often around eight employees per faculty member's lab group. Inspection of Harvard University's Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, and Harvard Medical School's Department of Cell Biology, indicates that there are 12.6 employees in addition to each member of the faculty. Whether we adopt a ratio of eight (BC anecdotal evidence) or 12.6 (Harvard examples), just the 23 new natural sciences faculty members will bring with them an additional 184 to 290 employees in the other (staff) categories.

These additional employees must be accounted for transparently and included in BC's traffic, transportation, and parking plans. In so doing, BC will likely have to increase the number of parking spaces to be built on-campus as part of their IMP. For example, an increase in 290 staff employees (compared to an increase of 12 in the IMPNF) would require an additional 222 parking spaces (using 80% auto mode share for faculty and staff).

7. Inadequate Parking Spaces in Master Plan. Even with BC's estimated increase of only 100 faculty, 12 staff, and 342 graduate students (Table 6-3), the master plan does not construct enough new parking spaces to accommodate those new employees.

Faculty and staff currently have a 80% auto mode share (Table 6-4), while students have an auto mode share of 26% (Table 6-4). [Note: BC needs to separate students into undergraduate and graduate students for tabulating mode share and other statistical data.] Using these mode share numbers, BC's estimated increase in employees requires an increase in 179 new parking spaces, but their master plan only increases parking spaces by 36.

The needed increase in the number of parking spaces should be scoped and included in the IMP. Furthermore, the location of these parking spaces is highly problematical: effectively, BC is moving 150 spaces from the main Chestnut Hill Campus to the Newton Campus, while their faculty and staff increase (80% of whom drive!) are likely to be concentrated in the Chestnut Hill Campus. The location of new parking spaces should follow the location of the new BC students and faculty. Modified locations for the new and/or substitute parking spaces should be scoped.

8. Substantial Improvement Is Needed to BC's Transportation Demand Management Program. Boston College's TDM program appears to have shown only limited success, in that 80% of their faculty and staff drive to work everyday (2007 IMPNF Table 6-4). In 2000, however, BC reported that 70% of their faculty and staff drove to work alone (2000 IMP, Appendix B, Table 9).

In the absence of an effective Transportation Demand Management Program, Boston College regressed in getting their faculty and staff to use alternate transportation methods. A vastly improved and aggressive TDM program, with clear targets and penalties, should be a requirement of their IMP.

Example: BC Should Subsidized MBTA Passes. It is astonishing that BC does not subsidize public transportation passes for their faculty or staff. One easy and effective way to reduce the auto mode share is to subsidize monthly T passes, for example, by 50% – and by allowing them to be purchased before payroll taxes are deducted.

9. New Cut-Through Route Will Divert Traffic Onto Foster Street. Currently, traffic from northbound St. Thomas More Road or eastbound Commonwealth Avenue cannot easily access Foster Street northbound without taking a U-turn on Commonwealth Avenue. (The intersection of Foster Street and Commonwealth Avenue does not extend across the MBTA B line tracks.) Opening up the new intersection at the entrance to the Brighton Campus will provide for a new cut-through route to Foster Street. Such additional traffic diverted onto Foster Street will overburden a narrow street already the subject of regular vehicle damage and speeding. The recent effects of the street closure next to the Brooks Pharmacy on Market Street created a 1 km backup along Foster Street, indicating how the street is critically burdened already.

The methods to prevent this cut-through route are: (1) locked gate [near Clements Hall] blocking through traffic, or (2) closed entrances to Brighton Campus [fully manned 24/7] requiring permit access for parking. Without either of these solutions, BC's proposal will create a new traffic route that would defeat the original layout of the streets emphasizing, e.g., Chestnut Hill Avenue for through traffic. BC should scope both options in their master plan and justify the final option.

10. Street Parking Study Should Be Performed to Determine Impact of Illegal Parking by BC Community on City Streets. BC does not provide on-campus parking for most of its undergraduates, leading to many parking off-campus illegally on city streets without resident parking stickers. Other commuters to campus avoid on-campus parking fees – or because they do not qualify for on-campus parking – by parking illegally on city streets.

BC should be required to to a thorough, wide-ranging, and complete street parking survey of the entire surrounding neighborhood within, say, 0.25 mile of any BC property. This survey should be done at a series of times at each location – e.g., midday; late-night on weeknights; and late-night on week-ends. The results should be compared to known locations for BC off-campus student rentals and on-campus buildings (e.g., academic, administrative, athletics, and housing). Cars should be identified by visible, legal parking stickers, any BC identification characteristics, state of license plate registration, etc. The availability of street parking throughout the impacted neighborhoods should also be fully documented.

All impacts of BC community using street parking must be addressed in the DPIR with a clear path towards resolution (and penalties for failing to meet targets) for all of those impacts. BC needs to be proactive to prevent such illegal parking by members of their community, rather than simply saying that it is the city's job to enforce those laws.

Sincerely,

Michael Pahre
76 Foster Street
Brighton, MA 02135
pahre@comcast.net
617-216-1447

Anti-Semitism and Misogyny in the Boston College Community

In a series of recent postings at online forums and a discussion group, fans of Boston College athletics have repeatedly used anti-semitic and misogynistic language directly at a Brighton resident and community activist. The language has also included the suggestion of violence towards her.

The victim has not, to date, filed a formal complaint with the police against the posters, nor has she pursued a restraining order against them.

The forums, Eagle Insider and Eagle Action, are popular among students, staff, and alumni of Boston College. The posters have also targetted a discussion group run by Brighton neighborhood activists working on the issue of BC expansion.

In addition to the language and threats, the victim's home address and that of another community activist have been posted, along with sophomoric suggestions for property damage or pranks.

Why have these community activists been targetted by some fans of BC athletics who frequent these websites? The obvious answer is that BC has proposed a substantial expansion of their athletic facilities as part of their institutional master plan; there are many neighborhood residents who oppose some or all of BC's proposals. These particular activists appear as the visible representatives of the neighborhood, regardless of whether or not they oppose the new athletic facilities.

Words of caution to readers of this blog: the language used is offensive and, in a number of cases, in my opinion, appears to qualify as hate speech.###


Anti-Semitism and Misogyny Amongst Some BC Sports Fans

Many fans of BC athletics visit two websites for regular information about their teams: Eagle Insider (mbd.scout.com) and Eagle Action (bcrivals.com). From the nature of many postings, most of the posters at the discussion groups appear to be alumni and/or students, although some unaffiliated fans of BC sports -- or also BC employees -- are no doubt also readers and posters.

The language on the discussion boards can be crude and crass, but is mostly focused on athletics.

Since May 2007, these two discussion boards have included direct references to four community activists -- three men (including myself), and one woman. At times the comments are harmless, while others are crude, obnoxious, or sophomoric.

Recently, however, the references at Eagle Insider have taken on a sinister, anti-Semitic, and misogynistic tone when discussing one of these activists.

Anti-Semitism. At Eagle Insider, bumpers wrote: "Then ask her whether her relatives at Dachau were too terribly upset with discrimination." That was preceded by a post by carolinaEagle08 stating that "someone should euthanize this bitch." Another user, eaglemaniac95, followed up with a reference to the wife of Adolph Hitler: "Clearly her name was Eva Braun before she changed it."

Other, more disturbing postings have already been deleted recently at Eagle Insider, according to one person who viewed the material earlier in the week.

The Jewish references were present in a more general form back in June 2007. Regarding neighborhood opposition for dormitories in the land purchased from St. John's Seminary, AlexFowler wrote at Eagle Action of (Jewish) Brandeis University: "If it was Brandeis looking to move into this neighborhood, we wouldn't be having this discussion." Another user, vellnueve, responded: "Perhaps referring to the high Jewish content of the non-student houses bordering the property?"

The comments are not limited to the discussion board, but a number of them have been sent to a Brighton neighborhood discussion group. A person with email address btg1204@gmail.com sent a posting to these neighborhood activists -- but clearly directed at the victim -- that read, in part, "Honestly you feminazi, BC couldn't care less about what you have to say." Normally, the comment "feminazi" might be dismissed as an anti-feminist comment that is found periodically among the modern lexicon. But its context amongst all these other comments shows that the term was also being used in an anti-Semitic manner.

All these remarks use Nazi history and imagery to paint a mean and nasty image of the victim. Not only are the remarks crude, they are truly offensive.

What makes the comments even more offensive is that the victim is a European immigrant who said that four of her direct relatives died in concentration camps at the hands of the Nazis in World War II.

The victim's maternal grandfather was sent to the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria (then occupied by Nazi Germany); her grandmother only learned after the end of the war that he had died there. Her great aunt, great uncle, and their child died at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland. The victim was raised a Catholic in Europe before immigrating to the U.S.

The posters may not have known of the victim's personal, tragic history related to the genocide perpetrated by Nazi Germany, but that really doesn't matter. The language used is anti-Semitic, and uses Nazi imagery in a casual and offensive manner directed at an individual.

Misogyny. Additional comments about the victim use a series of four- and five-letter words referencing sexual organs, as well as another, shorter term that got Don Imus in trouble. Other comments were about her hypothesized sexual activity, as well as one comment suggesting to engage in sexual activity with her. The "feminazi" posting described above is a reference to someone being a feminist; in the context of all the other, repeated sexual language, its misogynistic intention is also apparent.

None of the male community activists who have been mentioned on the two discussion boards had any such sexual language directed at them.

Sophomoric Antics. Sophomoric antics are clearly also popular amongst these posters. One suggests leaving a "deuce" (feces, or "number two") on her doorstep, and another poster seconds the idea. A photograph taken by freak1, with his face partially obscured, was taken in front of the victim's house while holding a sign suggesting a tail-gating party be held there.

Intimidation. Two activists home addresses were given on the boards (including mine), and comments on the board indicate that board posters have visited both houses. The streets of two other activists were given on the boards, although without specific address numbers.

On the Eagle Action board in June 2007, vellnueve suggested that my house be egged, although this never occurred. Residents of Lake Street in Brighton have long complained that their cars and other property have been routinely damaged by students whenever there is a town-gown issue arising where the neighbors are butting heads with BC. A threat to egg a house may seem minor, but it gains greater concern when you realize how many Lake Street residents have suffered far worse property damage.

Far more sinister suggestions were made at Eagle Action by pepperlick, who recalled techniques common amongst organized crime in silencing snitches: "There could be some mysterious fires and some roughing up in the neighborhood. Old school style. Horseheads and fishes in newspapers. Puppies in mailboxes. Fat Tony style."

These last comments were made in direct response to a comment about one of BC's proposed buildings in their institutional master plan. The context makes it clear that the intent of identifying neighborhood activists is to intimidate them into not opposing BC's expansion plans.


Boston College Responds

While these two discussion boards are frequented by members of the BC community, both are third-party sites with no known, direct affiliation with BC.

At a public meeting of the BC Task Force Wednesday night, BC Vice President for Governmental and Community Affairs Tom Keady, Jr., responded to the series of postings at the Eagle Insider discussion board. "Yesterday, I was given a copy of that website," he said. "BC has nothing to do with that website."

"We don't tolerate this kind of language," he continued. "It is deplorable. On behalf of BC, I would like to apologize for that language."

Keady indicated that he has met with BC's in-house legal counsel and the chief of police. The nature of the actions BC officials appear to be considering are related to pointing out to the owners of mbd.scout.com how certain users have violated the terms of use for the site.

I asked Keady if BC will consider blocking on-campus access to the websites. He gave a qualified yes, adding that he would have to contact BC's information technology group to explore this option.

I note that the option to block a website is one that is rarely taken lightly by institutions of higher education. The comments involved in these postings, however, appear to constitute hate speech of a nature that most universities would at least consider banning from their campus computer network.

Keady made no mention on what actions BC would take if they were to identify any of the posters at the websites as current students or employees at BC.


Is This Behavior Unique to the Boston College Community?

Online discussion boards on sports themes, such as Eagle Insider and Eagle Action, often include crude language and banter amongst the posters.

What makes these series of incidents unique, however, is that the posters have targetted an outside community activist with their anti-semitic and misogynistic comments. They have also published home addresses, advocated infliction of (minor) property damage, and engaged in what appears to be intimidation.

Viewing the language as a whole, it is hard to avoid the characterization of it as potentially an incitement to violence. The "euthanize" comment is an appalling example of that.

As BC is expanding into Brighton, Harvard University is also expanding into Allston. I asked Harry Mattison -- editor of the Allston-Brighton Community Blog ("allston02134") and moderator of two google groups ("AB2006" and "Allston-Brighton North Neighbors Forum") -- if he has seen any behavior remotely like this from the Harvard community.

Mattison said that there had been nothing direct at him personally, just a few "moronic" comments posted onto his blog. As a reader of Mattison's google groups, I can also verify that I don't ever remember seeing vitriolic or offensive comments on those discussion groups coming from students and/or alumni of Harvard.  Members of the Harvard community clearly don't harass the neighbors in any way even remotely similar to these incidents.

The question has to be asked: Why is it that some members of the Boston College community engage in anti-Semitic and misogynistic language directed at neighborhood activists, while members of the Harvard community do not?

Casual inspection of postings at these two BC sports discussion boards indicates that they appear to be popular and widely-read among BC students, alumni, and presumably also staff -- yet none of the readers seem to be voicing offense at the language or tactics of the posters, demanding that they stop, or asking that they be banned from the websites. One comment at Eagle Insider indicated that nobody is ever banned from that website.

A second question needs to be asked, then, too: Where is the outrage among BC sports fans at this behavior?



### I cringe at including these sort of anti-Semitic and misogynistic comments on this blog. I believe, however, that it is crucial to see the specific comments made in order to grasp fully their nature. It may also be important as an enduring record: several other postings at Eagle Insider have already been deleted since the victim made it clear that she was aware of the site.


UPDATE (1/17/08): While I strongly discourage readers from searching these two discussion boards for the various comments posted there, for those who do so a caveat is necessary. Several neighborhood residents' names have been adopted as monikers (handles) by other people posting at Eagle Insider. The postings under those names are not those of the individual, but rather they are a further example of the activity going on at that board targetted at members of the Brighton community.

BC Task Force Meeting Wednesday 1/16 at 6:30 pm

BC Task Force Meeting
Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 6:30-8:30 pm
Brighton Marine Health Center, 77 Warren Street, 3rd floor, Brighton MA 02135

For more information, contact: John Fitzgerald, Project Manager, BRA, 617-918-4267, John.Fitzgerald.bra@cityofboston.gov

Public comments on IMPNF: Due February 5, 2008 to the BRA.

Note: The BC Task Force has requested that attendees, if possible, provide them with written comments at their meetings. It doesn't have to be a formally-written letter, etc., but anything to help them assemble information in addition to verbal comments at the meetings. Address letters to Jean Woods, Chair, BC Task Force. You can also email them to the task force at bctaskforce@yahoo.com

BC's master plan website with electronic version of their project notification form


Agenda: Transportation, Traffic, and Parking Issues in BC's 10-year institutional master plan

See Chapter 6 of the 12/5/07 IMPNF.

Intersection changes. Boston College has proposed a three-fold modification to the intersection of Commonwealth Avenue, Lake Street, and St. Thomas More Road:

1. Move the MBTA T station ("Boston College") from northeast of the intersection to a center station east of the intersection;
2. Construct a new intersection on Commonwealth Avenue east of the intersection for a new entrance into the Brighton Campus (former St. John's Seminary land); and
   
3. Re-route St. Thomas More Road further to the east so that it lines up with the new intersection in #2.

While BC's presentation to the April meeting of the BC Task Force dealt with #2 and 3, MBTA officials backed out of attending that meeting at the last minute. BC's presentation on December 4th stated that that MBTA supports #1, but we have not heard directly from the MBTA itself as to what that means. Who pays for #1 will also be an important detail.

Will these changes to the intersection improve its level-of-service? At the April 2007, BC's consultants said yes, but the jury is still out on this until their assumptions, data, analysis, and conclusions are subject to an independent peer review. In at least one previous case, BC's consultants have made poor predictions about traffic level-of-service.

Parking spaces. The master plan includes removal of many parking spaces (particularly surface lot spaces) and construction of many others (both underground spaces and parking garage structures) for a net increase of 36 spaces. BC's employees will increase by 100 faculty, 12 staff, and 342 graduate students over the next 10 years, but 36 new (net) parking spaces is more than 140 short of accomodating these new employees assuming current auto mode share rates.

Furthermore, BC's expansion in the natural sciences, in particular, appears to neglect all of the additional employees associated with the laboratory sciences -- post-doctoral fellows and researchers, lab technicians, etc. -- which would lead to a substantially higher number for the increase in staff than 12. (See previous story for extrapolation based on Harvard GSAS and Harvard Medical School figures; BC has not provided similar numbers related to their current demographics in the natural sciences or other fields in which they plan to expand their faculty.) Such additional staff would be accompanied by additional need for parking spaces not included in the master plan.

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. While BC has included some elements of a TDM program (e.g., zipcars), there are other elements that are surprisingly not included: BC neither does not subsidizes MBTA passes nor charges employees (faculty, staff, and students) for parking on-campus. Both subsidized T passes and charging for parking are standard practices for institutions of higher education in Boston and surrounding areas.

[NOTE: Comment posted below contradicts this, saying that both students and faculty now pay for parking. The IMPNF states no such charges, except for the case of graduate students who pay to park at the Orkney Road site (page 6-8). The IMPNF only states that "are required to register their vehicles and obtain a parking permit to park on campus." Inspection of this website at BC indicates the parking fees for faculty and staff.]

Brighton Power Outage This Afternoon for Two Hours

Brighton experienced a power outage this afternoon for around two hours beginning shortly after 3 pm.

The NStar automatron over the phone referred to the impacted areas as "Brighton and surrounding communities." It clearly covered a large swath around Brighton Center, but I didn't start making calls around the neighborhood to hear the true extent. Post a comment [below] to indicate if you lost power, and what street you're on.

The automatron also said that power would be restored by "noon" (= tomorrow!) -- fortunately, that wasn't the case, as it was restored around 5:30 pm today.

My guess as to the cause? The rain last night followed by very wet snow is weighing down tree branches a lot. I've already seen one small tree bent over so much that part of it broke, and several shrubs of ours that are bent over all the way to the ground. A downed power line from a fallen branch or tree seems a likely cause, although the extent of the outage is larger than you'd expect for even a well-placed power line. (I'm sure that Rochester, NY residents will laugh, however, if we call this a borderline ice storm...)

When the power came on, I had just moved all our refrigerator perishable contents to our 40-mud room. It provides double-duty throughout the colder months as a large, walk-in refrigerator with somewhat variable temperature (usually close to 40 degrees fahrenheit, just like a refrigerator).

Will we get a sudden, mad rush for batteries and flashlights at local stores? I predict so.


UPDATE (11 pm): The Allston-Brighton TAB reports that 2,500 Brighton customers were without power for one-and-one-half hours-- more like two-and-one-quarter by my watch -- and that the problems wasn't tree limbs downing power lines, but rather excessive water in an underground cabling system.

Snow Emergency; Boston Public Schools Closed Monday

City Declares Snow Emergency - Sunday 1/13/2008


Mayor Thomas M. Menino today declared a snow emergency in anticipation of forecasted heavy snowfall tonight. The snow emergency and parking ban will go into effect at midnight tonight. Putting public safety as the top priority, Mayor Menino reminded residents of the following:

# Move cars from main arterials during snow emergencies. A listing of main arterials can be found at: www.cityofboston.gov/snow/parking.asp

# Do not park cars within 20 feet of an intersection. Parking too close to an intersection can restrict emergency vehicle access.


# Do not throw snow back into the street. "Throwbacks" force the city to remove snow from the same street twice.

# Shovel out fire hydrants close to your home.


# Property owners are reminded to shovel snow from sidewalks that abut homes and businesses.


# Do not double park.

# Keep wheelchair ramps clear.


# Check on elderly and neighbors and others in need.


During declared snow emergencies, discounted parking is available at several parking lots and garages to cars that display Boston resident parking stickers. A list of locations is available at www.cityofboston.gov/snow.

Residents with storm-related questions or concerns should call the City of Boston Storm Center at (617) 635-3050.


Boston Public Schools

Closed for Monday, January 14, 2008

Picture ThisNOW: New City Councilors Sworn In, Then Cropped Out

BostonNOW isn't having a good week.

First, their printed paper being distributed mid-morning today has a cover title, "Obama's big day / High turnout among independents could be his key in N.H." Oops. Senator Hillary Clinton beat Senator Barack Obama in yesterday's New Hampshire Democratic primary, but that final result appears to have come in too late for BostonNOW's publication deadline. The print edition distributed later in the morning appears to have a different cover -- fortunately about Senator John McCain's big day, not former Governor Mitt Romney's.

The Obama-gaffe was preceded by a story in yesterday's BostonNOW about the swearing-in ceremony for the Boston City Councilors at Faneuil Hall Monday. Noting that the Council "welcomed two new members: John Connolly and Mark Ciommo of Allston-Brighton," BostonNOW ran an accompanying photo -- then proceeded to crop both new councilors out of the photo. Maybe this is a freshman councilor hazing stunt by the media?

In the photo -- or, more properly, out-of-the-photo -- Councilor Connolly is in the front-row off-camera to the right; Councilor Ciommo is in the back-row, also off-camera to the right. The Boston Globe ran a picture with all the councilors on page B1 of Tuesday's paper.

Let's hope the two new City Councilors get treated better when assigning them office space.

Letter to BC Task Force: Athletics Facilities

At Tuesday night's meeting of the BC Task Force on the topic of athletic facilities in Boston College's Institutional Master Plan Notification Form, I presented the following letter to the task force for their consideration.

The information in the letter grew out of a series of community meetings of the BC Neighbors Forum during 2007 which I facilitated.  It is not a "position paper" (nor a public comment for the scoping determination) per se, but instead my attempt at summarizing the various concerns that were raised at those meetings.

The letter focuses on the "Brighton Fields," the athletic facilities in the former St. John's Seminary land.  At the end, I append a couple of additional comments I made at the meeting about the proposed Shea Field Dorms and the proposed Recreation Center on the Lower Campus.


To: Jeanne Woods, Chair, BC Task Force
Date: January 8, 2008

Dear Ms. Woods,

Here are a series of issues that I have heard raised about the athletic facilities proposed by Boston College as part of their Institutional Master Plan Notification Form of December 5, 2007:

1. Motivation. Why does BC need to create new and fancy baseball and softball stadiums? This doesn't line up with anything in BC's strategic plan. (The closest thing seems to be “student formation.”) Only 8% of BC undergraduates play varsity sports. Only 37/16 students play varsity baseball/softball. 400-600 play intramural softball (depending on double-counting), which is only around 4-7% of the total undergraduate population. Baseball attendance is usually low, according to John Bruno, such that current, modest bleachers are adequate. The motivation for adding seats over current capacity needs to be scoped and strongly justified.
   
   
2. Impact of Playing Fields on Neighbors' Quality-of-Life. Brighton residents who live next to Rogers Park have complained of the following problems, which are likely to be at least as bad for neighbors (e.g., along Lane Park) of BC's proposed Brighton Fields. All these issues need to be fully scoped as to how BC's proposed IMP will mitigate their impacts.
   
   • Lighting. Bright field lights prevent people from going to sleep and are highly damaging to young children's sleep patterns. Light even illuminates rooms facing away from the field.
     
   • Noise. Ballgames, even without spectators and amplified sound systems, are often so loud that TVs and closed windows cannot drown out the sounds.
     
   • Drinking. Even at playing fields where alcohol is banned, its usage is frequent and magnifies other problems.
     
   • Parking. City enforcement of illegal parking is poor-to-nonexistent next to city parks on the weekends when usage peaks. Residents cannot find spaces and have their driveways blocked.
     
3. Constraints on Usage. BC's IMPNF gives absolutely no indication of how the usage of the playing fields and stadiums would be constrained. Strong constraints should be fully scoped.
   
   • Lighting. BC proposes that all four fields will be fully lighted for nighttime use.
   • Design. How can this lighting be designed to minimize impact to neighboring houses?
     
   • Usage Hours. How can the usage hours of the lighting be minimized so that they are only occasionally used? For example: lighting only allowed for ___ games and ___ practices of the baseball/softball varsity teams, and never used for intra-murals.
     
   • Usage. How many days and nights per year will each field be used? BC has only given an indication of the number of baseball games, not the number of hours of intramural practices, games, tournaments, etc. Far more students participate in intra-murals (thousands) than in all varsity athletics (780). Example: practices only allowed until 5 pm/8 pm winter/spring.
     
   • Community Access to Fields. The fields are currently a natural resource of Brighton, a neighborhood with a lower per capita amount of open space than Boston as a whole. How will Brighton residents be able to use the fields for access, walking, informal play, organized sports, etc.? Harvard, for example, allows both informal neighborhood and community club use of their track outside of varsity sports practice times.
     
   • Overflow Crowds for Baseball. The hillside by St. Clement's Hall will lie beyond the baseball stadium's outfield, but could easily be used informally as overflow spectator seating for 500-1000 or more people. How will BC enforce (or prevent) additional spectator usage of the hillside? (Expanding a baseball stadium using hillside seating has been used in the ACC!)
     
   • Sound System. Softball practices at Shea Field have been reported to be noisy with sound systems playing loud music. Strict limitations on sound system usage is necessary.
   
   
4. Artificial Turf vs. Natural Turf. Standard artificial turf contains toxic chemicals that are dangerous both to users and the environment. Testing in a number of cases has shown chemical levels in excess of some state laws and/or regulations. See: http://www.synturf.org/ .
   
   The primary issue that keeps coming up with artificial turf is the toxicity of the rubber crumb layer. Standard industry practice constructs the rubber crumb out of used (recycled) automobile tires.
   
   Disposal of such tires by consumers and industry is heavily regulated – but, strangely enough, it is not regulated as far as its use as a layer for artificial turf fields. In many communities it is illegal to throw tires into the trash (which goes to landfills), but it is perfectly OK to dump tires into the ground for a playing field.
   
   Rubber crumb contains a wide variety of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Many PAHs have been studied and classified by the EPA as "known" or "probable" human and/or animal carcinogens (cancer-causing).
   
   The PAHs primarily enter the human body through inhalation (e.g., dust), while they can enter into the water table via the small pelletized crumb.
   
   Sweden, for example, has banned the use of recycled tires in construction of artificial turf fields. Communities throughout the country, including towns near to Boston, have been re-considering plans to install artificial turf because of the potential carcinogenic exposure.
   
   Artificial turf fields also provide no natural habitat for wildlife currently inhabiting the area. Birds, for example, rely on worms in the soil.
   
   A convincing case has yet to be made as to why three of the four athletic fields proposed for the Brighton Campus need to be constructed of artificial turf. The Boston Red Sox do perfectly well on grass and many, if not most, professional athletes prefer natural turf. The effects of toxic rubber crumb on air quality, athletes, the water table, and nearby Chandler Pond all need to be fully scoped along with an independent environmental [impact] peer review.
   
   Needless to say: artificial turf salesmen are inadequate sources of information.
   
   
5. Moving Baseball Stadium Away From Lane Park. Issues about the baseball stadium noise, lights, and usage would be lessened if it could be moved further away from the houses on Lane Park (and Glenmont Road). Relocating the stadium away from houses should be scoped. [NOTE: there are two possibilities: 1. moving it closer to the Edison School, possibly including a 180 degree rotation; and 2. moving it close to the currently proposed site for the softball stadium.]
   
   
6. Deed Restriction on Brighton Athletic Fields. BC has included no deed restrictions in their IMPNF to protect Brighton Campus open space from future development. Harvard University recently agreed to such a restriction for land next to the Arnold Arboretum. A deed restriction on the playing fields should be scoped as a requirement of construction of the Brighton Fields.  [NOTE:  Jeanne Levesque said at the meeting that a "conservation easement" is the correct term for this, not "deed restriction."]
   
   
7. Impact on St. John's Seminary and Seminarians. How will construction and usage of these athletic facilities impact the historical building St. John's Hall? How will it impact the life of diocesan seminarians? Many seminarians may be worried about speaking publicly of their concerns. The task force should seek confidential input from this community.

Sincerely,

Michael Pahre
76 Foster Street
Brighton, MA 02135
pahre@comcast.net
617-216-1447

8. Shea Field Dorm Location.  The current location of one building among the Shea Field Dorms is directly across St. Thomas More Road from the Chestnut Hill Reservoir.  Valid concerns have been raised about the location of this dorm so close to public open space.  Moving the building next to the (expanded) parking garage would allow for a more gradual increase in building height from Reservoir to stadium, and provide appropriate setback from the Reservoir.  Relocating this building should be investigated and scoped.


9. Recreation Center Location.  BC has proposed constructing the new Recreation Center at the current location of Edmonds Hall, a 790-bed dormitory.  Inspection of the dimensions of the Rec Center show that it fits within the More Hall parcel, and is of similar height to the More Hall Dorms proposed for that site.  This scenario would increase the net number of undergraduate beds on-campus by 370!  (Edmonds Hall's 790 beds would not need to be razed, while the proposed More Hall Dorms, with 420 beds, would not be built.)  This option should be fully explored and scoped, particularly since it can be implemented without any project sequencing delay.

Dunk the Sign?

The blog-world is a-twitter after a Boston Globe story ran over the weekend saying that the 1957-vintage, neon Dunkin' Donuts sign at the corner of Market Street and North Beacon Street in Brighton will likely be replaced.

The story has been around all year, though. First word of the sign's probable demise appeared back in March 2007 in the Globe, when reporter Will Kilburn dialed up most of the Brighton Allston Historical Society's masthead for comment:

"My personal feeling is that it should be preserved in the neighborhood somewhere," said John Quatrale , who recently helped plan and open the Brighton-Allston Heritage Museum . "It may not seem very historical right now, but it could become a very special commercial artifact." ...

"I'm sort of neutral on it," said Charlie Vasiliades , the Brighton Allston Historical Society's vice president. "I've never been too enamored with the Dunkin' Donuts look, but I don't hate it either."

"That sign has never struck me as particularly beautiful," said historical society board member Eva Webster . " I'd take a big, robust tree in a town center over any large sign any time."

Standing across the street from the "nuclear aircraft carrier" -- the brand, spanking-new WGBH headquarters -- the neon sign has definitely seen better days.

I've got a different proposal: get rid of the Dunkin' Donuts restaurant altogether. We've got enough of them already. The local franchise owner should be able to create an even more prosperous business catering to the hungry GBH-oids at meal-time.

What to do with that old neon sign in my new scenario? Project its image on the WGBH digital mural over the Mass Turnpike. Then we can enjoy it for all eternity -- and from miles away.


POSTSCRIPT (1/13/08): Read this story about this Dunkin' Donuts, a 20-inch crucifix, and Boston Police in riot gear.

BC Task Force Meeting Today: Athletic Facilities

BC Task Force Meeting
Tuesday, January 8, 2008, 6:30-8:30 pm
Brighton Marine Health Center, 77 Warren Street, 3rd floor, Brighton MA 02135

For more information, contact: John Fitzgerald, Project Manager, BRA, 617-918-4267, John.Fitzgerald.bra@cityofboston.gov

Public comments on IMPNF: Due February 5, 2008 to the BRA

BC's master plan website with electronic version of their project notification form


Agenda: Athletic facilities proposed in BC's 10-year institutional master plan

Boston College has proposed to convert the two informal ("multipurpose") athletic fields at the north end of their Brighton Campus (former St. John's Seminary land, adjacent to the Edison School) into four athletic fields, an underground support facility ("field house") and recreation center, and a 500-car parking garage.

Of the four athletic fields, two would be built out as stadiums: a 1500-seat baseball stadium and a 500-seat softball stadium. The other two fields would be "multipurpose" fields whose use includes intramural sports. All four fields are proposed to be fully lighted for nighttime use. All of the fields, except for one nearest to Lake Street, would have artificial turf installed.

The underground field house of 100,000 square feet would include locker rooms, restrooms, batting cages, tennis courts, indoor track, "training space" (likely a weight room), and concessions.

Crime Fell 14% in Allston-Brighton in 2007

The Boston Police Department has released preliminary year-end crime statistics for the 2007 calendar year as compared to 2006. (The fourth quarter of 2007 data are preliminary and subject to change.)

Overall crime in Allston-Brighton district D-14 in 2007 is down nearly 14% when compared to 2006.

Crime dropped in every tabulated category (homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft) except for one, larceny, which rose just over 3%. All these trends were similar both in Allston-Brighton D-14 and city-wide in Boston.


Boston Police Department
Preliminary 2006 vs. 2007 Crime Data Comparison
District D-14 (Allston-Brighton)

	2006	2007	Percent Change
Homicide	2	0	-100%
Rape and Attempted	31	22	-21%
Robbery and Attempted	117	83	-29%
Aggravated Assault	194	181	-7%
Burglary and Attempted	696	418	-40%
Larceny and Attempted	1341	1385	+3%
Vehicle Theft and Attempted	263	191	-27%
Totals	2644	2280	-14%

Mayor Menino Opposes BC's Proposed Brighton Dorms

The Boston Globe published a lengthy editorial in today's paper on university expansion and dormitory construction throughout the city of Boston: "Academic sprawl."

The editorial quotes Mayor Thomas Menino's position on Boston College's proposed dormitories on its Brighton Campus (the former St. John's Seminary land):

Last week, opponents of the BC plan appeared to pick up an ally in Mayor Menino, who also said he wants to see the new dorms "all on one location" south of Commonwealth Avenue. BC is eager to build new academic centers, an arts district, recreation center, and other keys to a great future. But it must also build political support.

As recently as a few weeks ago, one city insider was still mum about the Mayor's position on the dorms. As previously reported here, local elected officials have mostly already taken positions in opposition to this particular dorm proposal.

Unconfirmed rumors have been swirling around Brighton that city officials told BC to make a specific change to their institutional master plan prior to submitting it in December, but that BC refused to do so. The Brighton Dorms seemed the likely candidate for city opposition, and the Mayor's new position on the dorms only reinforces that perception.

My suspicion is that Mayor Menino staked out a firm position now because he had heard enough from Brighton voters that he wanted to head off any possible embarrassing development, like his flip-flop on Suffolk University's Beacon Hill dorm a year ago. In the Suffolk case, Mayoral opposition effectively killed the dorm proposal on-the-spot, since we all know who carries the weight in the city -- even though, under Article 80 of the zoning code, the Mayor has no official statutory authority to approve or reject the projects. (Note: the BC student newspaper, The Heights, appears confused on this issue; see the end of this post.)

Why would Mayor Menino choose the last week to make public his opposition? The Boston Redevelopment Authority -- whose Board has the statutory authority for approval of BC's dorm proposal -- is holding the city's internal scoping meeting tomorrow on Tuesday, January 8th. The Mayor has now telegraphed his position, and city officials won't be worried about expressing their open opposition to these dorms.

Menino's now-public position on the Brighton Dorms is also a wise political move for a Mayor who appears headed towards a 2009 re-election campaign: opposition to unpopular projects, such as this particular one from BC, could be exploited by a Mayoral challenger on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. His position could be argued as yet another indication of his desire for another term as Mayor.

BC Task Force Meeting Schedule for January

I have not received confirmation of all of the following meetings, but this is the tentative meeting schedule planned by the BC Task Force in January. So... dates, times, and agendas are subject to change. [UPDATE 1/4/08: this list of meetings and times has been confirmed by a member of the task force.] All topics fall within the task force's review BC's recently submitted institutional master plan notification form.

All meetings are 6:30 pm, Brighton Marine Health Center, 77 Warren Street, Brighton.

January 8 [Tuesday]: BRA required meeting under Article 80; athletic facilities. (Note: John Fitzgerald of the BRA confirms this meeting, although no notice of it appears, e.g., in the Community Notes listings of the January 4th online edition of the Allston-Brighton TAB.)

January 16 [Wednesday]: Traffic, transportation, and parking

January 22 [Tuesday]: Housing

January 29 [Tuesday]: Open space, academic uses, and summary


The task force was also interested in having a meeting just for the neighbors, i.e., no city and/or institutional representatives. It was left unclear if that would be an additional meeting or if one of the above agendas would be changed to accomodate it.

Rise of the Paulistas

News out of Iowa is not Mike Huckabee getting out the evangelical vote over Mitt Romney, or Barack Obama getting out the younger vote over Hillary Clinton -- despite one poor prediction to the contrary. No, the big result in last night's Iowa caucuses was something else.

Ron Paul got 10% of the Republican vote.

Paul has been consistently polling in the 1-3% range. When combined with the typical poll sampling errors of 5-6%, this means that his support was statistically consistent with minus 2%. The polls missed all those Paulistas out there, even though their presence was there for all to see in Paul's runaway fundraising. Paul got nearly triple the number of votes of Rudy Giuliani.

I had all but written off the libertarian wing of the Republican party in the last decade after Pat Buchanan showed poorer and poorer -- and even bolted (for a time). But now we know that 10% of the Republican vote goes for an unflinching philosophy of libertarianism -- including non-interventionism and opposition to the Iraq War.

The Paulista troop surge was tactically successful on the ground in Iowa. His good showing, along with such a heavily split field, shows why the Democrats will have two active candidates into March and the Republicans at least three heading into summer.

OT: Predictions for the 2008 Presidential Race

The Iowa caucuses will take place tonight, so now's the time for predictions in the races for the Democratic and Republican parties' nominations for president. Everybody else seems to be making predictions, so I wouldn't like to be left out. Is there a Brighton angle? Not exactly, but there is a Massachusetts one.

• Three Democrats and four-to-six Republicans will still be in the race on the morning of February 5th. The conventional wisdom is that the first contest (Iowa or New Hampshire alternating for the honor) whittles down the field to no more than three, while the other contest further narrows it down to no more than two candidates per party. This year's races are so wide open, and the primary/caucus calendar so compressed, that more candidates will be hanging in until the large batch of primaries on February 5th.
  
  Where would I get such a crazy idea? Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and John McCain will do well enough in Iowa and New Hampsire (combined) that they'll stay in the race. Huckabee is staying until at least South Carolina's primary, since those voters are closest among early primaries to his core supporteres. Rudy Giuliani is ignoring the early contests (save Florida), so he'll stay in the race until Super Tuesday. So that's at least four Republicans until February 5th. And Ron "Jackpot" Paul is buried in cash trying to figure out where to spend it -- since Romney has been buying up all the available TV ad time in Iowa and New Hampshire; Paul makes a possible fifth Republican. And Fred Thompson is a question mark; who knows how long it will take the actor to read his lines in the tea leaves -- he is a possible, albeit unlikely, sixth Republican going into February.
  
  Among Democrats, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will both continue through February 5th; John Edwards will join them if he can get two decent finishes in Iowa and South Carolina.
  


• Romney edges out Huckabee in Iowa; McCain edges out Romney in New Hampshire; Clinton edges out Obama in Iowa; Clinton/Obama toss-up in New Hampshire. You think that Allston-Brighton residents don't vote? Compare Iowa caucus-goers: they'll be lucky to get much more than 10% percent of the 2 million eligible registered voters. When turn-out is that low, organization counts. Highly-organized, on-the-ground efforts by Romney and Clinton favor them regardless of contrary polling results -- because polls are poor trackers of actual caucus-goers.
  
  New Hampshire is different: polls give a reasonable indicator of the vote. But polls typically try to predict likely primary voters based on voting history, while the electorate is fired up about Obama -- just witness his consistently large crowds any time he speaks. Many newer voters are poised to come to the polls for Obama. New Hampshire voters like independently-minded politicians, which is why McCain really will pull out the comeback.


• Democrats will have clear nominee before their convention; Republicans will not. The Democratic race will turn into two candidates after February 5th, but one will likely take a significant lead in the races after the early March contests; the second-place candidate, either Obama or Clinton, will step out of the race in early March. If the primary contests are dead even or lean Clinton, then she gets the nomination due to overwhelming support of the super-delegates; if Obama has a strong lead in primary delegates (3:2 or better) by the Ides of March, then Clinton calls it quits.
  
  Republicans, however, will have three candidates (McCain, Romney, Giuliani) -- possibly four (with Huckabee) -- splitting up the vote through early February and quite possibly through early March. That means no clear victor. The Republican convention will be entertaining, with no one winning the nomination on the first vote. Think of all the horse-trading and wagering on who will make it into the second round of balloting. If Huckabee gets lots of primary delegates (possible, but unlikely), then the convention will be an absolute mess because all the super-delegates will be allied against him -- they just won't know who to rally around.
  


• Massachusetts makes major mistake moving primary up to February 5th. Yes, Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin was worried that we'd be left out of the primary races if we voted in March. See above, however, where neither race is decided before the early March primaries. Whoever is voting in those early March states, when the primary calendar is less-crowded, will get lots of attention nationally; as it is, Massachusetts will get lost among 23 states on February 5th on a day that produces no single winner for either party's nomination. On February 6th we'll all decide that Secretary Galvin should have kept his hands off of the Massachusetts primary date.
  
  
• November general election. There ain't no way I can predict the outcome of the November election given how uncertain the races are today. But this thing is certain: if the Republican party nominates Mike Huckabee (some call it Huckacide), they'll lose in November. The editorial cartoonists, however, will win. And we'll have two months of crazy Huckabee quotations about international affairs this Fall preceding his party's fall.
  

As is usual, laugh without mercy as these naive predictions are proven wrong. Historically, my predictions for local races have been close or a bit off the mark.

Did Anybody Else Get Coal in Their Stocking?

Just before Christmas, the Allston-Brighton TAB published an op-ed piece by me about Boston College's history since 1993 of regulatory filings with the Boston Redevelopment Authority right before the holiday season ("BC delivers lump of coal to Brighton’s Christmas stocking").

The result of such inopportune timing? The already short public comment periods are effectively shortened by everyone's distraction over seemingly less unimportant things -- like lighting candles on Hannukah, shopping for Christmas presents, attending Christmas holiday parties, celebrating Kwanzaa, singing Auld Lang Syne on New Year's Eve, worshipping at the college football bowl game altar with an almond-covered cheese ball, etc.

This holiday season has continued the trend: Boston College filed its institutional master plan with the BRA on December 5, 2007, followed up by an advertisement apparently in the Boston Herald on December 10. The 30-day public comment period following that was voluntarily extended 15 days by BC (quite likely as a result of a request by the city); it was extended another 12 days as a result of a request made by the BC Task Force at their December 18 meeting.

It's quite obvious to many people -- from the neighbors to many City Councilors and even at least one city employee -- that there are parts of Article 80 in the city's zoning code that need serious overhaul.

One short-coming of Article 80 is how ineffectively the statute can respond to large-scale institutional expansion projects (such as Boston College's or, especially, Harvard University's in Allston). Thirty-day public comment periods, which cannot be extended by the city without voluntary action by the institution, are demonstrably inadequate when dealing with these large and complicated master plans. Article 80 is being stretched to its breaking point because it wasn't designed with such massive projects in mind.