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.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Update: City Councilor-At-Large Candidates' Warchests
The campaign finance reports for the first half of October have come in, so we can update the total amounts raised and spent by each campaign.
Note that these reports are only for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large, who are required to file electronically twice a month during the campaign. The Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council candidates will file their next reports on paper eight days before the election, i.e., next Monday, October 29th. Harry Mattison and I will try to get those out electronically soon after they are filed.
NOTE: responses to a questionnaire for the City Councilor-At-Large candidates will be posted here tomorrow (Wednesday, October 24th). Visit again soon!
Reporting Period: January 1, 2007 -- October 15, 2007
Campaign Finance To Date
Councilor Michael Flaherty continues to out-raise and out-spend all of his competition. He made a very large wire transfer of $90,000 out of his account on 10/12/07; while the OCPF does not provide a description of this expenditure (he will probably have an auditor request that soon for such a large, un-itemized amount), it looks just like a major ad buy close to the election.
Note that these reports are only for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large, who are required to file electronically twice a month during the campaign. The Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council candidates will file their next reports on paper eight days before the election, i.e., next Monday, October 29th. Harry Mattison and I will try to get those out electronically soon after they are filed.
NOTE: responses to a questionnaire for the City Councilor-At-Large candidates will be posted here tomorrow (Wednesday, October 24th). Visit again soon!
Reporting Period: January 1, 2007 -- October 15, 2007
| NAME | END_DATE | BEG_BAL | RAISE | OWN_MONEY | SPEND | END_BAL |
| Felix Arroyo | 10/15/07 | 3720.04 | 24916.03 | 0.00 | 27869.20 | 767.83 |
| John Connolly | 10/15/07 | 35926.65 | 195746.67 | 10000.00 | 125756.40 | 115916.52 |
| William Estrada | 10/15/07 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Michael Flaherty | 10/15/07 | 447262.56 | 282491.15 | 0.00 | 290993.92 | 438759.79 |
| Matthew Geary | 10/15/07 | 0.00 | 3647.01 | 0.00 | 2797.35 | 849.66 |
| Martin Hogan | 10/15/07 | 0.00 | 1621.13 | 0.00 | 1270.66 | 350.47 |
| Stephen Murphy | 10/15/07 | 43710.09 | 82615.00 | 250.00 | 43342.23 | 83232.86 |
| David Wyatt | 10/15/07 | 0.00 | 363.00 | 0.00 | 341.78 | 21.22 |
| Sam Yoon | 10/15/07 | 47636.17 | 158623.00 | 0.00 | 128172.29 | 78086.88 |
| TOTAL | 10/15/07 | 578,255.51 | 750,022.99 | 10,250.00 | 620,543.83 | 717,985.23 |
Councilor Michael Flaherty continues to out-raise and out-spend all of his competition. He made a very large wire transfer of $90,000 out of his account on 10/12/07; while the OCPF does not provide a description of this expenditure (he will probably have an auditor request that soon for such a large, un-itemized amount), it looks just like a major ad buy close to the election.
Former City Council Candidate Alex Selvig Endorses Mark Ciommo
Alex Selvig unsuccessfully ran for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat in the preliminary election last month. He seems to have been researching the remaining two candidates, Mark Ciommo and Greg Glennon, and their positions on the issues prior to making an endorsement.
I have noticed that Selvig has had a Ciommo sign up on his front lawn for a number of days, indicating it is clear who he would be voting for. Now, he has expanded that into an endorsement of Ciommo's candidacy.
Selvig says of Ciommo:
I have noticed that Selvig has had a Ciommo sign up on his front lawn for a number of days, indicating it is clear who he would be voting for. Now, he has expanded that into an endorsement of Ciommo's candidacy.
Selvig says of Ciommo:
Mark Ciommo is always at meetings, park cleanups, and other community events, and has faithfully attended all of our debates. He respects the people of Allston-Brighton.Tim Schofield has already endorsed Ciommo in the final election. Only Rosie Hanlon and James Jenner have not endorsed a candidate; I think that Hanlon's long wait might be indicative that she will not endorse either candidate.
Mark's broad support makes him less beholden to special interests, and will allow him to be an open, accessible, and honest broker for the citizens of our community. I look forward to working with him as our next City Councilor.
Monday, October 22, 2007
A Novel Way of Chronicling Disorderly Conduct
Seventeen people aged 17-25 were arrested on charges of disorderly conduct late Sunday night and/or early Monday morning in the Kenmore Square area following the Boston Red Sox's victory in the American League Championship Series, according to the Suffolk County District Attorney's office.
For some of them, the judge has given them a novel sentence to write a lot of sentences:
And in order to pass a sentence, must Judge Redd have read them first?
Via UniversalHub.
For some of them, the judge has given them a novel sentence to write a lot of sentences:
Roxbury District Court Judge Edward Redd ordered that the remaining seven defendants, most of whom are college students, write a five-page essay detailing what they have each learned from the experience of getting arrested and that they provide the court with written verification that their parents are aware that they have been arrested and charged in connection with this incident. Judge Redd also ordered that they stay away from Fenway Park over the duration of the season. They must provide the essay and parental notification of their arrest at their arraignment on Nov. 8.I wonder if the judge at Brighton Municipal Court has considered similar sentences as punishment for arrests/convictions in our neighborhood? How about an extra page for extra credit to have bail reduced? How will he mark them down for mis-spellings, grammatical errors, run-ons, and sentence fragments? Five pages... single- or double-spaced? Maximum font size? Punish the writing-challenged by having them share a cell with Bubba? Will he require them to use the spelling "Socks" or "Sox"?
And in order to pass a sentence, must Judge Redd have read them first?
Via UniversalHub.
University PILOT Payments Detailed
The Boston Globe ran another story about university PILOTs (payments in lieu of taxes) to Boston and surrounding cities. (BTW: I carefully avoid repeating that repetitious phrase of redundancy, "PILOT payments.") The story hook was a recent study by Newton's Blue Ribbon Commission on the Municipal Budget.
A summary:
Berklee School of Music: $175 thousand to Boston
Boston College: $215 thousand to Boston; $100 thousand to Newton
Boston University: $3.20 million to Boston
Harvard University: $1.77 million to Cambridge; $1.75 million to Watertown; $1.60 million to Boston
MIT: $1.22 million to Cambridge
Northeastern: $137 thousand to Boston
How much is brought in by each city?
Boston: $23 million per year (as of 2003)
Cambridge: $3.6 million
Newton: $100 thousand (apparently BC is the only university/college contributing)
Watertown: $1.75 million (I'm not sure if there are any PILOTs other than Harvard)
The point put forward by Newton's Blue Ribbon Commission is that, for example, Boston College owns property in Newton with a combined, assessed value of $355 million -- one-third of the value of all the tax-exempt property owned within Newton -- and yet Newton only receives a very small PILOT. (The remainder of the tax-exempt properties? Roughly $300 million in governmental and religious institutional property. Also, "Newton-Wellesley Hospital... reported $392 million in net assets to the IRS in 2005," although assets are not the same as property holdings.) BC's property value holdings are substantial, and their PILOTs appear disproportionately small by comparison to the other institutions listed here.
A summary:
Berklee School of Music: $175 thousand to Boston
Boston College: $215 thousand to Boston; $100 thousand to Newton
Boston University: $3.20 million to Boston
Harvard University: $1.77 million to Cambridge; $1.75 million to Watertown; $1.60 million to Boston
MIT: $1.22 million to Cambridge
Northeastern: $137 thousand to Boston
How much is brought in by each city?
Boston: $23 million per year (as of 2003)
Cambridge: $3.6 million
Newton: $100 thousand (apparently BC is the only university/college contributing)
Watertown: $1.75 million (I'm not sure if there are any PILOTs other than Harvard)
The point put forward by Newton's Blue Ribbon Commission is that, for example, Boston College owns property in Newton with a combined, assessed value of $355 million -- one-third of the value of all the tax-exempt property owned within Newton -- and yet Newton only receives a very small PILOT. (The remainder of the tax-exempt properties? Roughly $300 million in governmental and religious institutional property. Also, "Newton-Wellesley Hospital... reported $392 million in net assets to the IRS in 2005," although assets are not the same as property holdings.) BC's property value holdings are substantial, and their PILOTs appear disproportionately small by comparison to the other institutions listed here.
Journalism, Journalists, and Bloggers
The cacophony continues about whether or not bloggers are journalists, and whether or not they practice journalism. This particular case not only offers a good opportunity to ask generally what is the relationship between blogging and journalism, but to explain how Brighton Centered itself fits into the picture. So we'll start at NECN and BMG, depart to a length trio about Brighton Centered, and then join back in the recapitulation and development of the principal themes.
Beat the Press and NECN Beating Up Bloggers
The latest incident throwing a wrench into the debate occurred a week-and-a-half ago when several writers for the BlueMassGroup blog, who were about to watch a debate among the candidates for the 5th Congressional District, were asked to leave the audience at the NECN studios. Their exclusion was at the request of the handlers for Republican candidate Jim Ogonowski. The reason given was that the BMGers are partisans in the election, having endorsed Ogonowski's opponent, Democrat Niki Tsongas, and actively participated in raising contributions for Tsongas's candidacy through links on their website.
The BMGers left the studios without incident (everyone involved appears to have behaved well publicly), but raised the issue later -- online, of course, but also through the MainStream Media. (See BMG discussions here, here, and here.) The topic was taken up by the pundits on WGBH's "Beat the Press" edition of Greater Boston on Friday, October 12th (video available), who came down on both sides of the issue. Dan Kennedy, of Northeastern University, said that the bloggers should have been able to stay since the BMG bloggers "practice journalism" -- even if they are not professional journalists in a traditional definition -- while John Carroll of Boston University said that those particular bloggers may have been rightfully excluded, because they stepped over the journalistic line by participating in fundraising activities.
Phil Balboni, president of NECN, drew a stark line separating bloggers from journalists when he stated, in a taped interview, that:
Does Brighton Centered Practice Journalism?
Let's not just be general about bloggers, let's look at one blog in particular: Brighton Centered. In my view, blogs that deal with local issues, politics, and so on, most closely parallel local newspapers. There are a series of functions that any MSM newspaper will typically contain, and news-related blogs are no different:
What You Will and Will Not Find at Brighton Centered. Here at Brighton Centered, I have made a clear and conscious decision to do #1-3, not to do #4, and not to bother with #5 (because I can't imagine I would make enough money to justify the time spent trying to do so).
This is a very important set of distinctions to make: I endorse no position or candidate for elected office (an "editorial" or "endorsement") like BMG did, while I consider it a key element of this blog to provide thoughtful opinion and analysis of the news and community issues. If I see a stupid proposal I am free to call it that -- while providing details supporting the point -- but I do not need to endorse a position or a person who proposed (or opposed) that stupid idea.
The problem with the blogging corps is that we are all too often a single person who tries to do all of #1-3 and maybe also #4. Newspapers, on the other hand, simply have more than one person working for them and can therefore cleanly separate the news desk from the columnists and the editorial board. It is often quite difficult to separate the news from the opinion... but more on that in a moment.
Does Brighton Centered Practice Journalism? I believe the answer is yes. There is probably little question in readers' minds that I have strived to perform a public service here by providing such a wide-range of information on candidates for elected office; a reader can find plenty examples of such journalism currently by looking at the top-right column of this blog. Postings here regularly fit neatly into categories #1, 2, and 3 above.
Some blogs are simply opportunities for the writer to collect, rewrite, or comment on news reported elsewhere. Does Brighton Centered do its own reporting [#2 above]? Once again, the answer is a clear yes. Reporting has included: campaign finance reports (and thereby correcting inaccurate reporting found in the Boston Globe), neighborhood meetings (e.g., BC Task Force), election-day problems and get-out-the-vote-efforts, IP addresses, candidate interviews, dying trees, unblocked-and-then-reblocked Wiltshire Road, local angle on EPA lead-paint allegations, phone surveys, a Ward 21 endorsement, correcting misinformation about bicycle paths in the Boston Globe, community policing in Brighton, a rabid raccoon, past contributions to political campaigns, structurally deficient bridges in Allston-Brighton, candidate opposition to BC's proposal to build Brighton Dorms, withdrawal of two and then another candidate from the race, flooding and a fire along the Charles, etc., ... I'm tiring out from all this linking, so I'll just let you read the last six months of posts.
More to the point: do news-related posts such as these follow standard practices of journalism? Mostly yes, but I am always open to criticism and education on this point. The specific item on which I might be considered to most often depart from "standard journalistic practice" is getting on getting comments from subjects of news stories. The code of ethics states that a journalist should always "diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing." I rarely carry outright accusations of wrongdoing -- and, when I do, I am very conscious about offering the opportunity to respond -- but there are many more cases in the gray area where I don't always seek out a response. While it may not always appear to be the case (!), I do significant fact-checking behind the scenes, much as is expected by a MSM journalist, and follow the standards on when information can be reported as fact or as assertion. If I were a full-time journalist, I would have far more time to track down more sources... but I've got a real job that pays the bills. Such are the trade-offs of the citizen journalist beat.
Separating News From Opinion on a Blog. One way of separating news (#2) from opinion (#3) would be to label the top of every post as either one or the other. Unfortunately, that is often a harsh remedy which divides up a story in an unnatural way -- fully separating the information itself from the analysis of it. Nonetheless, I have used this approach frequently, for example when covering the City Council candidate forums with news quotations and transcript as opposed to analysis, or when providing precinct-level election results and then analyzing them.
Another way to separate news from opinion is by using section headers that offer a fairly clear distinction. Examples of this are in my reporting on campaign finance (for District 9 Councilor and Councilor-At-Large), casino gambling, BC's possibly new -- possibly old -- student behavior policy, and CRI beginning construction of a new boathouse.
A more subtle method to separate news from opinion comes from simple language usage: moving from the active or passive voice to the first person. See the section in this post (above) labelled, "Beat the Press and NECN Beating Up Bloggers," where the last paragraph provides my analysis of NECN President Balboni's remarks and the preceding paragraphs report on other people's positions. Since most of the readers here are well-read and understand the subtleties of language, I believe they can appreciate and follow the simple change of voice, which is a clear way of separating factual news from opinion. This use of language is commonly found in my technical scientific writing, where the factually-supported, strong voice "experiment X causes result Y" can be immediately followed by the (first-person plural) assertion that "we consider the experimental approach to be systematically biased."
Reader Comments. Opinion and commentary also enter into Brighton Centered through another route: comments by readers to the post. Here, I have made some clear decisions that define the nature of the comments allowed. Brighton Centered's reader comments are moderated and require the user to have a Google/Blogger account -- no anonymous reader comments are allowed.
Why? News posts touching Boston College sports in any way -- even when purely factual and containing no opinion or commentary -- routinely result in a torrent of offensive, poorly-written, and totally off-topic responses from readers who are devoted fans of BC sports. (A tiny minority of such fans, I'm sure.) Such reader comments accuse me of bias, hatred of BC sports, etc., even when the posts themselves (and Brighton Centered altogether) contain no such statement; such accusations are not just ignorant, since they have no factual basis, but they would massively clutter up this blog were it to be un-moderated and/or allow anonymous comments.
I have also regularly rejected partisan reader comments on elections-related posts that are of a non-partisan nature. I consider it inappropriate to have reader comments like, "What a stupid answer by Candidate X," attached to a post which is the candidates response to a questionnaire he returned to me. There are places on a blog for reader comments -- but a post containing non-partisan, raw information about a candidate is not such a place.
Does BlueMassGroup Practice Journalism? Is It Even a Blog?
BlueMassGroup is an interesting, albeit odd, online community. It does not squarely follow the format of a blog or a newsgroup; instead, it is a merger of the two, with all of the warts that brings. Blog posts by core members of BMG are typically followed by a wide-ranging discussion of the topic by lots of readers. While it has many lengthy posts, the BMG nonetheless often becomes comment-heavy, not poster-content heavy, which often gives it more of the feel of an active newsgroup than a tightly-controlled blog.
BMG Ejection. The criticism levelled at BMG by John Carroll on Beat the Press was direct and relevant. Newspapers may endorse a candidate but do not participate in fund-raising activities for him/her, so BMG has stepped over a reasonable line drawn by newspapers over the years. As a result, BMGs activity can be argued, with merit, as partisan on the issue of the 5th Congressional District race.
Assuming that NECN had a written document describing how the debate would be run (including who would be in the audience), and had sent this document to the candidates well in advance of the event, then I think that the BMGers probably would not have qualified for press credentials to the event. But NECN appears to have granted press credentials in advance to the BMGers, so we can only conclude that there was no written policy banning journalists who participate in fund-raising activities for one or more candidates. (Or that NECN didn't follow their own rules.)
That said, I don't know why the *&#$ NECN would ban the BMGers from the audience at the studio debate. I have moderated two candidate forums in the last month, and will moderate another debate this week, that have had audiences full of partisans supporting one candidate or another. A professionally-run event simply has to set ground rules for audience behavior (such as no signs, applause, or talking); trust me, the audience will follow the rules and behave with decorum if you ask them. By all accounts, the BMGers were well-behaved and courteous. When NECN President Balboni ejected the BMGers from the audience, he was providing zero confidence in the ability of his own moderator, Jim Braude, to run the event professionally and keep a lid on the audience. I think Balboni's behavior is sad and warrants an apology directly to Braude. If BMGers received press credentials to the event according to NECN's written policy on the debate format, then they should have been allowed in. If Ogonowski's people objected, then he should have walked out the door. His decision, his loss.
BMG, Op/Eds, and Editorials. Some at BMG are correct to state the parallel between their writing and the Op/Ed opinion columns typically found in newspapers. My understanding, however, is that newspapers typically forbid Op/Ed columns from endorsing a specific candidate: "[New York] Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates," wrote Thomas Friedman recently. News journalists usually steer clear of endorsements as well as fund-raising activity. Dan Rather of CBS, for example, was criticized in 2001 for participating in a private campaign fund-raiser, although he later stated that he was given inaccurate advance information about the event.
BMG has enough contributing members that they could easily form a small "editorial board" to decide upon endorsements, while leaving the other writers to express Op/Ed opinions and report on the political news. It would be a worthy exercise to examine the BMG archives to see if they follow any such procedure, and also if such a process is fully transparent to the reader. I am an occasional reader of their site, so I lack a full understanding of their process, but I would hazard a guess that their endorsement process is not fully transparent to the casual reader of their site (like me). Now is their opportunity to define a process for making endorsements which is structured, transparent, and clearly defines the roles of various, specific individuals in contributing to that process. If they do so, then they will be able to justify why certain individual BMGers contributing to their site are free from allegations of editorial bias. The MSM has already invented that wheel by separating editorials from news; BMG would be well-advised not to ignore that invention.
Beat the Press and NECN Beating Up Bloggers
The latest incident throwing a wrench into the debate occurred a week-and-a-half ago when several writers for the BlueMassGroup blog, who were about to watch a debate among the candidates for the 5th Congressional District, were asked to leave the audience at the NECN studios. Their exclusion was at the request of the handlers for Republican candidate Jim Ogonowski. The reason given was that the BMGers are partisans in the election, having endorsed Ogonowski's opponent, Democrat Niki Tsongas, and actively participated in raising contributions for Tsongas's candidacy through links on their website.
The BMGers left the studios without incident (everyone involved appears to have behaved well publicly), but raised the issue later -- online, of course, but also through the MainStream Media. (See BMG discussions here, here, and here.) The topic was taken up by the pundits on WGBH's "Beat the Press" edition of Greater Boston on Friday, October 12th (video available), who came down on both sides of the issue. Dan Kennedy, of Northeastern University, said that the bloggers should have been able to stay since the BMG bloggers "practice journalism" -- even if they are not professional journalists in a traditional definition -- while John Carroll of Boston University said that those particular bloggers may have been rightfully excluded, because they stepped over the journalistic line by participating in fundraising activities.
Phil Balboni, president of NECN, drew a stark line separating bloggers from journalists when he stated, in a taped interview, that:
Bloggers are not journalists. Not in my definition. You know, the objectivity, the accuracy, the completeness, the balance, and so on and so forth. A story has to have integrity. Bloggers have -- they may or may not wish to subscribe to those standards.I find that Balboni's statement is self-contradictory: "bloggers may or may not wish to subscribe to those standards" means that those who do are therefore journalists. But that contradicts his point that "bloggers are not journalists," unless he can demonstrate that there exists no blogger on Earth who follows those journalistic standards. Methinks Balboni failed to source his own material; furthermore, I predict that he is probably ignorant about the the blogging corps because he has read little of their writing. To their credit, Beat the Press then countered Balboni's assertion by providing contradictory opinions, i.e., more than one example of a blogger who qualifies as a journalist in their mind. Practicing journalism score card: Beat the Press 1, NECN President Balboni 0.
Does Brighton Centered Practice Journalism?
Let's not just be general about bloggers, let's look at one blog in particular: Brighton Centered. In my view, blogs that deal with local issues, politics, and so on, most closely parallel local newspapers. There are a series of functions that any MSM newspaper will typically contain, and news-related blogs are no different:
- Community event listings
- News reporting
- Opinion (aka "Op/Ed" or columns)
- Editorials
- Advertising
What You Will and Will Not Find at Brighton Centered. Here at Brighton Centered, I have made a clear and conscious decision to do #1-3, not to do #4, and not to bother with #5 (because I can't imagine I would make enough money to justify the time spent trying to do so).
This is a very important set of distinctions to make: I endorse no position or candidate for elected office (an "editorial" or "endorsement") like BMG did, while I consider it a key element of this blog to provide thoughtful opinion and analysis of the news and community issues. If I see a stupid proposal I am free to call it that -- while providing details supporting the point -- but I do not need to endorse a position or a person who proposed (or opposed) that stupid idea.
The problem with the blogging corps is that we are all too often a single person who tries to do all of #1-3 and maybe also #4. Newspapers, on the other hand, simply have more than one person working for them and can therefore cleanly separate the news desk from the columnists and the editorial board. It is often quite difficult to separate the news from the opinion... but more on that in a moment.
Does Brighton Centered Practice Journalism? I believe the answer is yes. There is probably little question in readers' minds that I have strived to perform a public service here by providing such a wide-range of information on candidates for elected office; a reader can find plenty examples of such journalism currently by looking at the top-right column of this blog. Postings here regularly fit neatly into categories #1, 2, and 3 above.
Some blogs are simply opportunities for the writer to collect, rewrite, or comment on news reported elsewhere. Does Brighton Centered do its own reporting [#2 above]? Once again, the answer is a clear yes. Reporting has included: campaign finance reports (and thereby correcting inaccurate reporting found in the Boston Globe), neighborhood meetings (e.g., BC Task Force), election-day problems and get-out-the-vote-efforts, IP addresses, candidate interviews, dying trees, unblocked-and-then-reblocked Wiltshire Road, local angle on EPA lead-paint allegations, phone surveys, a Ward 21 endorsement, correcting misinformation about bicycle paths in the Boston Globe, community policing in Brighton, a rabid raccoon, past contributions to political campaigns, structurally deficient bridges in Allston-Brighton, candidate opposition to BC's proposal to build Brighton Dorms, withdrawal of two and then another candidate from the race, flooding and a fire along the Charles, etc., ... I'm tiring out from all this linking, so I'll just let you read the last six months of posts.
More to the point: do news-related posts such as these follow standard practices of journalism? Mostly yes, but I am always open to criticism and education on this point. The specific item on which I might be considered to most often depart from "standard journalistic practice" is getting on getting comments from subjects of news stories. The code of ethics states that a journalist should always "diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing." I rarely carry outright accusations of wrongdoing -- and, when I do, I am very conscious about offering the opportunity to respond -- but there are many more cases in the gray area where I don't always seek out a response. While it may not always appear to be the case (!), I do significant fact-checking behind the scenes, much as is expected by a MSM journalist, and follow the standards on when information can be reported as fact or as assertion. If I were a full-time journalist, I would have far more time to track down more sources... but I've got a real job that pays the bills. Such are the trade-offs of the citizen journalist beat.
Separating News From Opinion on a Blog. One way of separating news (#2) from opinion (#3) would be to label the top of every post as either one or the other. Unfortunately, that is often a harsh remedy which divides up a story in an unnatural way -- fully separating the information itself from the analysis of it. Nonetheless, I have used this approach frequently, for example when covering the City Council candidate forums with news quotations and transcript as opposed to analysis, or when providing precinct-level election results and then analyzing them.
Another way to separate news from opinion is by using section headers that offer a fairly clear distinction. Examples of this are in my reporting on campaign finance (for District 9 Councilor and Councilor-At-Large), casino gambling, BC's possibly new -- possibly old -- student behavior policy, and CRI beginning construction of a new boathouse.
A more subtle method to separate news from opinion comes from simple language usage: moving from the active or passive voice to the first person. See the section in this post (above) labelled, "Beat the Press and NECN Beating Up Bloggers," where the last paragraph provides my analysis of NECN President Balboni's remarks and the preceding paragraphs report on other people's positions. Since most of the readers here are well-read and understand the subtleties of language, I believe they can appreciate and follow the simple change of voice, which is a clear way of separating factual news from opinion. This use of language is commonly found in my technical scientific writing, where the factually-supported, strong voice "experiment X causes result Y" can be immediately followed by the (first-person plural) assertion that "we consider the experimental approach to be systematically biased."
Reader Comments. Opinion and commentary also enter into Brighton Centered through another route: comments by readers to the post. Here, I have made some clear decisions that define the nature of the comments allowed. Brighton Centered's reader comments are moderated and require the user to have a Google/Blogger account -- no anonymous reader comments are allowed.
Why? News posts touching Boston College sports in any way -- even when purely factual and containing no opinion or commentary -- routinely result in a torrent of offensive, poorly-written, and totally off-topic responses from readers who are devoted fans of BC sports. (A tiny minority of such fans, I'm sure.) Such reader comments accuse me of bias, hatred of BC sports, etc., even when the posts themselves (and Brighton Centered altogether) contain no such statement; such accusations are not just ignorant, since they have no factual basis, but they would massively clutter up this blog were it to be un-moderated and/or allow anonymous comments.
I have also regularly rejected partisan reader comments on elections-related posts that are of a non-partisan nature. I consider it inappropriate to have reader comments like, "What a stupid answer by Candidate X," attached to a post which is the candidates response to a questionnaire he returned to me. There are places on a blog for reader comments -- but a post containing non-partisan, raw information about a candidate is not such a place.
Does BlueMassGroup Practice Journalism? Is It Even a Blog?
BlueMassGroup is an interesting, albeit odd, online community. It does not squarely follow the format of a blog or a newsgroup; instead, it is a merger of the two, with all of the warts that brings. Blog posts by core members of BMG are typically followed by a wide-ranging discussion of the topic by lots of readers. While it has many lengthy posts, the BMG nonetheless often becomes comment-heavy, not poster-content heavy, which often gives it more of the feel of an active newsgroup than a tightly-controlled blog.
BMG Ejection. The criticism levelled at BMG by John Carroll on Beat the Press was direct and relevant. Newspapers may endorse a candidate but do not participate in fund-raising activities for him/her, so BMG has stepped over a reasonable line drawn by newspapers over the years. As a result, BMGs activity can be argued, with merit, as partisan on the issue of the 5th Congressional District race.
Assuming that NECN had a written document describing how the debate would be run (including who would be in the audience), and had sent this document to the candidates well in advance of the event, then I think that the BMGers probably would not have qualified for press credentials to the event. But NECN appears to have granted press credentials in advance to the BMGers, so we can only conclude that there was no written policy banning journalists who participate in fund-raising activities for one or more candidates. (Or that NECN didn't follow their own rules.)
That said, I don't know why the *&#$ NECN would ban the BMGers from the audience at the studio debate. I have moderated two candidate forums in the last month, and will moderate another debate this week, that have had audiences full of partisans supporting one candidate or another. A professionally-run event simply has to set ground rules for audience behavior (such as no signs, applause, or talking); trust me, the audience will follow the rules and behave with decorum if you ask them. By all accounts, the BMGers were well-behaved and courteous. When NECN President Balboni ejected the BMGers from the audience, he was providing zero confidence in the ability of his own moderator, Jim Braude, to run the event professionally and keep a lid on the audience. I think Balboni's behavior is sad and warrants an apology directly to Braude. If BMGers received press credentials to the event according to NECN's written policy on the debate format, then they should have been allowed in. If Ogonowski's people objected, then he should have walked out the door. His decision, his loss.
BMG, Op/Eds, and Editorials. Some at BMG are correct to state the parallel between their writing and the Op/Ed opinion columns typically found in newspapers. My understanding, however, is that newspapers typically forbid Op/Ed columns from endorsing a specific candidate: "[New York] Times columnists are not allowed to endorse candidates," wrote Thomas Friedman recently. News journalists usually steer clear of endorsements as well as fund-raising activity. Dan Rather of CBS, for example, was criticized in 2001 for participating in a private campaign fund-raiser, although he later stated that he was given inaccurate advance information about the event.
BMG has enough contributing members that they could easily form a small "editorial board" to decide upon endorsements, while leaving the other writers to express Op/Ed opinions and report on the political news. It would be a worthy exercise to examine the BMG archives to see if they follow any such procedure, and also if such a process is fully transparent to the reader. I am an occasional reader of their site, so I lack a full understanding of their process, but I would hazard a guess that their endorsement process is not fully transparent to the casual reader of their site (like me). Now is their opportunity to define a process for making endorsements which is structured, transparent, and clearly defines the roles of various, specific individuals in contributing to that process. If they do so, then they will be able to justify why certain individual BMGers contributing to their site are free from allegations of editorial bias. The MSM has already invented that wheel by separating editorials from news; BMG would be well-advised not to ignore that invention.
Friday, October 19, 2007
A-B District 9 City Council Candidates Debate: Tuesday 10/23 at 6:30 pm at the Edison School
Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council Candidates Debate:
Mark Ciommo vs. Gregory Glennon
Tuesday, October 23
6:30 pm -- Informal Meet-and-Greet
7:00 - 8:30 pm -- Candidates Debate
Sponsored by: Brighton Allston Improvement Association
and Allston Civic Association
Location: Edison Middle School
60 Glenmont Road, Brighton, MA 02135
Parking at rear of building
Moderator: Michael Pahre, Editor, Brighton Centered Blog
On November 6 we will elect a new Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor. There will be questions about issues that are important both city-wide and locally here in Allston-Brighton. Audience-written questions will also be accepted.
For more information, contact Abigail Furey of the BAIA at (617)782-1382.
Mark Ciommo vs. Gregory Glennon
Tuesday, October 23
6:30 pm -- Informal Meet-and-Greet
7:00 - 8:30 pm -- Candidates Debate
Sponsored by: Brighton Allston Improvement Association
and Allston Civic Association
Location: Edison Middle School
60 Glenmont Road, Brighton, MA 02135
Parking at rear of building
Moderator: Michael Pahre, Editor, Brighton Centered Blog
On November 6 we will elect a new Allston-Brighton District 9 City Councilor. There will be questions about issues that are important both city-wide and locally here in Allston-Brighton. Audience-written questions will also be accepted.
For more information, contact Abigail Furey of the BAIA at (617)782-1382.
Presentation School Foundation's Jen Doyle to Appear on NECN Today
Last week, the Presentation School Foundation closed on their purchase of the former Presentation School from the Archdiocese of Boston. They also announced a large and generous grant from the New Balance Foundation to the tune of $350,000. The Allston-Brighton TAB has a lot of the details.
The Boston Globe wrote a nice editorial in today's edition, in which they pitched the PSF as a good group for other large charitable foundations in the region to support.
PSF President Jen Doyle will be appearing on NECN's "News Day Live" this afternoon at 4:00 pm to talk about their purchase of the school. Link to video
The Boston Globe wrote a nice editorial in today's edition, in which they pitched the PSF as a good group for other large charitable foundations in the region to support.
PSF President Jen Doyle will be appearing on NECN's "News Day Live" this afternoon at 4:00 pm to talk about their purchase of the school. Link to video
Head of the Charles This Weekend
The Head of the Charles Regatta returns this weekend with its exciting boat races, big crowds of cheering fans, corporate sponsor tents -- and inevitable tearing up of the lovely fields along the southern side of the Charles River at Herter Park and Artesani Park. One major change from previous years: there will no longer be a Saturday afternoon practice time, since that short time slot had resulted in as many as 700 shells working out on the river in two hour time window!
The Boston Globe has a series of stories on the event, along with a schedule of the Saturday and Sunday races and a viewer's guide.
Where to watch it?
My favorite spot is from the downstream base of the Eliot Bridge on the Allston side. At that location, the boats are nearing the end of navigating a hairpin corner -- and this spot is late enough in the race that many faster boats are trying to pass the slower ones. (The slower boat is required to yield the inside lane to the faster boat... but that doesn't always happen.) The result: inexperienced, slow boats end up close to running aground on the outer corner at the Cambridge Boat Club, and the occasional boat scrapes the supports of the Eliot Bridge; once I even saw a boat make a much harder collision with the bridge. Fun for spectators, but not for the coxswains who need a stiff drink at the end of the race.
Lots of people like to stand along the top of the various bridges along these corners and peer over the side: the Weeks Memorial Footbridge, the Larz Anderson Bridge, and the Eliot Bridge.
In case you didn't figure it out: avoid Memorial Drive all weekend, and also avoid much of Soldiers Field Road while you're at it.
The Boston Globe has a series of stories on the event, along with a schedule of the Saturday and Sunday races and a viewer's guide.
Where to watch it?
My favorite spot is from the downstream base of the Eliot Bridge on the Allston side. At that location, the boats are nearing the end of navigating a hairpin corner -- and this spot is late enough in the race that many faster boats are trying to pass the slower ones. (The slower boat is required to yield the inside lane to the faster boat... but that doesn't always happen.) The result: inexperienced, slow boats end up close to running aground on the outer corner at the Cambridge Boat Club, and the occasional boat scrapes the supports of the Eliot Bridge; once I even saw a boat make a much harder collision with the bridge. Fun for spectators, but not for the coxswains who need a stiff drink at the end of the race.
Lots of people like to stand along the top of the various bridges along these corners and peer over the side: the Weeks Memorial Footbridge, the Larz Anderson Bridge, and the Eliot Bridge.
In case you didn't figure it out: avoid Memorial Drive all weekend, and also avoid much of Soldiers Field Road while you're at it.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
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.
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.
Club Kirkwood Gets Clubbed
The two-family house in Brighton at 62-64 Kirkwood Road has long been a source of noise and loud parties according to nearby neighbors, and has been dubbed "Club Kirkwood" in the past by its residents. Off-campus Boston College undergraduate students have long been thought to occupy the house, and it was classified as one of 18 "problem houses" in the Kirkwood/Radnor area in 2006-7 by the Radnor neighborhood's group of residents who have been tracking the activity in their area.
62-64 Kirkwood Road's partying days appear over.
Boston College Police, in their joint patrols with Boston Police and moonlighting officials from the Office of Governmental and Community Affairs, visited the house three times since late August -- once finding around 80 kids there having a good time -- and found some dangerous conditions. As Bill Mills noted at the October 16th meeting of the BC Task Force, they allegedly found smoke detectors had been removed from the ceilings, missing CO detectors, underage drinking, and so on. A sting operation was planned for inspectors from the city's Inspectional Services Department, which identified other problems -- such as residents illegally housed in the basement, others housed in parts of the attic that don't meet height requirements, and locks on the bedroom doors (that might have constituted an illegal boarding house). Oddly enough, though, ISD issued no fines.
BC officials learned just what the neighborhood monitors have known for awhile: it can be difficult to track down the owner of some of these properties. The property was purchased in 2006 for $1.6 million -- way over its 2006 assessment of $1.04 million, i.e., probably one which the owner expects to charge high rents to large numbers of willing students -- by "Kirkwood Realty LLC." The listed address for that group was on Lincoln Street... but is no longer there. They tracked it down to someone in Watertown, and held an ISD hearing with him (and his lawyer) recently. Mills stated that the owner claimed to have terms in the lease banning parties, and that the owner agreed to initiate eviction proceedings if there are additional parties at the house.
The owner will be applying to the Zoning Board of Appeal to legalize some of these living conditions, such as the basement apartments. Paul Holloway of the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services said that it is city policy to deny such applications if the basement apartment is more than 50% below grade; it was unclear if this is the case for the house. Neighbors will have to be on the lookout for a ZBA hearing about the owner's application for a variance.
Some of the student residents' parents were notified about the living condition and partying problems, and many of the parents apparently met during parent weekend.
And, after all that, the house has been eerily silent the last few weeks. Club Kirkwood seems to have been clubbed at the knees.
Student Behavior Incidents Down Compared to Last Year
BC Task Force member Rosie Hanlon commented that off-campus student behavior has been a lot better this year compared to last year. Paul Chebator, Interim Dean of Students at Boston College, detailed a comparison of last year's student incidents with this year's, showing that the numbers have dropped. Note that his numbers refer to campus-wide incidents, rather than being broken down into off-campus incidents.
No students have been suspended or expelled yet this year, according to Interim Dean Chebator, but that would be unusual given that it is still early in the school year. Bill Mills noted that this year they are, in general, not seeing the large, 150+ student parties that were more common in the last few years.
Joint police patrols have made 52 visits to houses as of September 30th, where four of the houses were visited more than once and five of the houses turned out not to contain BC students. The hot spots? Upper Foster Street had 12 visits, Commonwealth Avenue, Kirkwood Road, and Radnor Road each had six, and Chestnut Hill Avenue had four.
Several residents commended BC officials on their job to contain off-campus partying. "We appreciate what you guys are doing," said Sandy Furman. But they noted that the ultimate solution to the off-campus student behavior problem is not going to be stepped-up enforcement, but rather a plan to house all BC undergraduate students on-campus. "This is a systemic problem," said task force member Kevin Carragee. "It will not go away until they are housed on campus." Having so many students occupying one- and two-family houses drives up the cost of housing, driving "working people from our neighborhood."
62-64 Kirkwood Road's partying days appear over.
Boston College Police, in their joint patrols with Boston Police and moonlighting officials from the Office of Governmental and Community Affairs, visited the house three times since late August -- once finding around 80 kids there having a good time -- and found some dangerous conditions. As Bill Mills noted at the October 16th meeting of the BC Task Force, they allegedly found smoke detectors had been removed from the ceilings, missing CO detectors, underage drinking, and so on. A sting operation was planned for inspectors from the city's Inspectional Services Department, which identified other problems -- such as residents illegally housed in the basement, others housed in parts of the attic that don't meet height requirements, and locks on the bedroom doors (that might have constituted an illegal boarding house). Oddly enough, though, ISD issued no fines.
BC officials learned just what the neighborhood monitors have known for awhile: it can be difficult to track down the owner of some of these properties. The property was purchased in 2006 for $1.6 million -- way over its 2006 assessment of $1.04 million, i.e., probably one which the owner expects to charge high rents to large numbers of willing students -- by "Kirkwood Realty LLC." The listed address for that group was on Lincoln Street... but is no longer there. They tracked it down to someone in Watertown, and held an ISD hearing with him (and his lawyer) recently. Mills stated that the owner claimed to have terms in the lease banning parties, and that the owner agreed to initiate eviction proceedings if there are additional parties at the house.
The owner will be applying to the Zoning Board of Appeal to legalize some of these living conditions, such as the basement apartments. Paul Holloway of the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services said that it is city policy to deny such applications if the basement apartment is more than 50% below grade; it was unclear if this is the case for the house. Neighbors will have to be on the lookout for a ZBA hearing about the owner's application for a variance.
Some of the student residents' parents were notified about the living condition and partying problems, and many of the parents apparently met during parent weekend.
And, after all that, the house has been eerily silent the last few weeks. Club Kirkwood seems to have been clubbed at the knees.
Student Behavior Incidents Down Compared to Last Year
BC Task Force member Rosie Hanlon commented that off-campus student behavior has been a lot better this year compared to last year. Paul Chebator, Interim Dean of Students at Boston College, detailed a comparison of last year's student incidents with this year's, showing that the numbers have dropped. Note that his numbers refer to campus-wide incidents, rather than being broken down into off-campus incidents.
| September 2006 | September 2007 | |
| Arrests | 6 | 3 |
| Situations | 42 | 24 |
| Students reported | 160 | 94 |
| University probation | unavailable | 6 |
No students have been suspended or expelled yet this year, according to Interim Dean Chebator, but that would be unusual given that it is still early in the school year. Bill Mills noted that this year they are, in general, not seeing the large, 150+ student parties that were more common in the last few years.
Joint police patrols have made 52 visits to houses as of September 30th, where four of the houses were visited more than once and five of the houses turned out not to contain BC students. The hot spots? Upper Foster Street had 12 visits, Commonwealth Avenue, Kirkwood Road, and Radnor Road each had six, and Chestnut Hill Avenue had four.
Several residents commended BC officials on their job to contain off-campus partying. "We appreciate what you guys are doing," said Sandy Furman. But they noted that the ultimate solution to the off-campus student behavior problem is not going to be stepped-up enforcement, but rather a plan to house all BC undergraduate students on-campus. "This is a systemic problem," said task force member Kevin Carragee. "It will not go away until they are housed on campus." Having so many students occupying one- and two-family houses drives up the cost of housing, driving "working people from our neighborhood."
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Armed Robbery Near Oak Square YMCA
From the BPD Daily Incident Report for 10/12/07:
Two Arrested For Armed Robbery
Early this morning at 1:38am, officers from District D-14 (Allston/Brighton) responded to a radio call for a sexual offense in the rear parking lot of the YMCA in Oak Square, involving two males one wearing camouflage. Officers observed two individuals fitting the description running down Nonantum Street. Upon seeing the officers, the suspects split up and ran in different directions.
A victim, who stated that those two men just robbed him, flagged the officers down. The victim further stated to officers that he was about to enter his house when the suspect called him over them. The victim further stated that the male with dark clothing held a gun to his head, while the other suspect held a knife to this stomach. The suspects demanded the victim’s wallet.
Officers observed the suspect with a white and black jacked jumping the fence, attempting to leave the park and enter the rear parking lot of the YMCA. The suspect was apprehended in the parking lot and was in possession of a knife. The second suspect was spotted running into the backyard of an address of Bigelow Street. The victim positively identified both suspects as the men who robbed him.
Two 19-year-olds from Brighton, Nicolas King and Daniel Mariano, were both arrested and charged with Armed Robbery.
Monday, October 15, 2007
A-B District 9 City Council Candidate Debate Tonight at 6:30 pm
The two finalists for the Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council seat will participate in a debate tonight at 6:30 pm at the West End House in Allston. Mark Ciommo and Gregory Glennon were the first and second place finishers, respectively, in the September 25th preliminary municipal election. Tonight's debate will be moderated by State Senator Steve Tolman.
Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council Candidates Debate
Sponsored by: Allston Board of Trade; Brighton Board of Trade;
Brighton Main Streets
Location: West End House, 105 Allston Street, Allston, MA 02134
Monday, October 15th
6:00 pm -- Meet-and-Greet With the Candidates
6:30 - 8:30 pm -- Debate
For more information: contact Bill at 617-277-5300.
The next candidate's debate will be held on Tuesday, October 23rd, at 6:30 pm, at the Edison Middle School, Brighton.
Allston-Brighton District 9 City Council Candidates Debate
Sponsored by: Allston Board of Trade; Brighton Board of Trade;
Brighton Main Streets
Location: West End House, 105 Allston Street, Allston, MA 02134
Monday, October 15th
6:00 pm -- Meet-and-Greet With the Candidates
6:30 - 8:30 pm -- Debate
For more information: contact Bill at 617-277-5300.
The next candidate's debate will be held on Tuesday, October 23rd, at 6:30 pm, at the Edison Middle School, Brighton.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
6-0 Football on Both Sides of Brighton
Football fans have watched Boston College's football program rack up a 6-0 record so far this year leading into today's game against Notre Dame. The Eagles are ranked 4th in the nation in the AP and USA Today polls, and 8th in the nation in what is arguably the most mathematically-justified algorithm.
Far fewer people have noticed, however, that on the other side of town at Brighton High School a team with a long history of losing records has totally turned the program around and rebuilt into a powerhouse. They beat Madison Park Friday night for the first time in school history, thereby staying undefeated this year with a 6-0 record. Bengals coach Timo Philip told the Boston Herald:
Far fewer people have noticed, however, that on the other side of town at Brighton High School a team with a long history of losing records has totally turned the program around and rebuilt into a powerhouse. They beat Madison Park Friday night for the first time in school history, thereby staying undefeated this year with a 6-0 record. Bengals coach Timo Philip told the Boston Herald:
“It’s all about building the program,” Philip said. “What’s important is that we didn’t take a step back from our goal, which is to go 12-0. They played tough, they got up and came back (after MP took an 8-6 lead) with no pouting or no pointing fingers. We just play good, hard football, and that’s what we’ve been pointing to.”Brighton High School made it to the Super Bowl game last year, but lost to West Bridgewater 34-14. Sounds like they have a bigger goal this year.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Boston College Files Institutional Master Plan Amendment
Boston College today filed its Institutional Master Plan Amendment (IMPA) Notification Form and Project Notificaton Form (PNF) with the Boston Redevelopment Authority.
The document can be found posted at Boston College's institutional master plan website.
BC is also appealing to the BRA to waive full review of this IMPA:
This IMPNF/PNF seeks to further amend the Approved Master Plan with respect to two Proposed Projects: (i) to substitute Bishop Peterson Hall for St. William’s Hall as the facility to be renovated and used as the location of the STM; and (ii) to include in the Approved Master Plan the renovation and use of the existing Library Building formerly owned by St. John’s Seminary for use by both the St. John’s Seminary and the STM.The STM is BC's new School of Theology and Ministry, which is the product of the merger with the Weston Jesuit School of Theology.
The document can be found posted at Boston College's institutional master plan website.
BC is also appealing to the BRA to waive full review of this IMPA:
Boston College respectfully requests that the BRA in its Large Project Review scoping determination for the Bishop Peterson Hall renovation waive the requirement of further review of these Proposed Projects pursuant to Section 80B-5.3(d) of the Zoning Code.This will be an important question for BC officials at Tuesday's meeting of the BC Task Force, particularly in light of their statement at the September 18th meeting that they would not be pursuing expedited review of this IMPA. Instead, they are seeking to waive the Draft Project Impact Report review -- not just the Final Project Impact Report like Harvard was recently successful in having waived. It will be important to hear them clarify why they need to avoid a DPIR altogether. The text of Article 80B-5.3(d) referred to begins:
Scoping Determination Waiving Further Review. If the Scoping Determination indicates that the PNF, together with any additional materials and comments received by the Boston Redevelopment Authority prior to the issuance of the Scoping Determination, adequately describes the impacts of the Proposed Project, the Scoping Determination may waive the requirements of both subsection 4 and subsection 5 of this Section 80B-5 for the filing and review of a Draft Project Impact Report (DPIR) and a Final Project Impact Report (FPIR). In such case, the Scoping Determination also shall include any conditions the Authority may require for the mitigation of such impacts..
Casino Gambling All Over the Map in the Boston City Council Race
At last Wednesday's forum for the candidates for Boston City Councilor-At-Large, all the candidates were asked to give their position on whether or not they support having a casino within the City of Boston.
Some people may call this a state issue, which is true to some extent: the State Legislature and Governor must first approve having casinos of any kind, or even just slot machines, in Massachusetts. Should the State not approve casinos, the Mashpee Wapanoag can also appeal to the Federal government's Bureau of Indian Affairs for approval.
But the issue is closer to home than that. While the state must approve having casinos altogether, local governments must decide whether to welcome, constrain, or block altogether construction of a casino in their community. That's why the candidates were all asked whether they backed a casino in Boston, not whether they backed casino gambling in Massachusetts altogether.
The Boston Globe recently surveyed Massachusetts residents and found 53% support leaning towards legalizing casino gambling in Massachusetts. Despite this, only one-third of respondents had actually made up their mind to support legalizing casino gambling; 40% are undecided for the time being (want more information), and 24% oppose it. A plurality of Massachusetts residents, and a majority of residents within Route 128, wanted any such casino to be in a rural location, i.e., relatively far from the urban Greater Boston area. Governor Deval Patrick's proposal, however, looks to having one of the three resort-style casinos to be located in or near to Boston, with Suffolk Downs (straddling the line between East Boston and Revere) as the odds-on favorite.
Where the Councilor-At-Large Candidates Stand on Casino Gambling
The Boston City Councilor-At-Large candidates expressed opinions all over the map on the issue of casino gambling in the City of Boston.
Councilor Stephen Murphy and challenger John Connolly expressed strong support for casino gambling in Massachusetts, and Murphy went further in wanting slot machines (albeit not a destination casino) at Suffolk Downs within the year. They cited the potential revenue as the justification for allowing casinos. Challenger David Wyatt appeared to be leaning towards casinos in general, but against Suffolk Downs in particular, because he doesn't want anybody competing against the Native Americans' own casinos.
Councilor Felix Arroyo and challengers Martin Hogan and Matthew Geary strongly opposed casino gambling anywhere, including Boston. "We don't have to gamble our future away," said Arroyo, who also cited many social concerns about the negative impacts of gambling on the public. Geary thought that the casino developers would be the main financial beneficiaries, not the public or the government. Hogan saw the inherent conflict due to the added burden of policing the casinos while the city instead needs more police on the streets.
Councilors Michael Flaherty and Sam Yoon were undecided on casinos. Flaherty said that destination casinos "hold much promise," but said that he wanted promises in writing about how the revenue created would guarantee state-wide direct benefits like additional police, school improvements, and job creation. Yoon understood the economic development arguments, but worried about gambling addiction and the possible role of "criminal elements" or the "underworld" in casinos.
Flaherty, Connolly, and Yoon all called for listening closely to residents of East Boston on the issue of a casino at Suffolk Downs. "We absolutely have to have a vigorous public process and a debate in East Boston," said Yoon. Flaherty went so far to say that he would "hold up judgment altogether" until he got the chance to "take the temperature" of the residents in East Boston. Only Councilor Murphy emphasized that the casino issue was one for the State, not the City, to deal with.
What Was Missing From Their Answers?
There were two substantial omissions from the eight candidates' answers. Most remarkable was how no one objected to casino gambling on clearly ethical grounds by saying, "I think gambling is wrong and we as a government shouldn't support it." The Archdiocese of Boston has come out strongly against legalizing casinos, so it surprises me that there weren't any candidates expressing such an objection. Sean Cardinal O'Malley said that "we unequivocally oppose casino gambling in the state." Should the Cardinal deny communion to casino supporters?
Also suprising was that no one saw the role that city government could play in blocking, or at least constraining, the construction of a casino at Suffolk Downs. Local governments have the power of zoning and permitting to make it very difficult to build an unpopular development, yet no candidate seized on this point. Casinos need water, sewer, and electrical lines, roads capable of holding traffic, liquor licenses, entertainment licenses, etc., all of which can be controlled partially or fully by city government. (I note that I have not examined the text of Governor Patrick's bill which might include language over-riding any local ordinances, zoning, etc.) While the State may control the issue of whether or not there can be casinos somewhere in Massachusetts, it will be up to our local elected officials to decide if we should welcome one here in Boston.
I was also amazed that none of the candidates really addressed the issue of whether or not Governor Patrick's analysis of the monetary benefits of legalizing gambling appeared credible. The casinos will necessitate additional public expenditures in roadway access, public safety, etc., and will also likely cause a substantial drop in Massachusetts Lottery revenues, so do we believe there will be a lot of money leftover? It is a good question, but the Governor blocked providing copies to the public of the documents he studied in coming up with his plan.
Allston-Brighton's Elected Officials on Casino Gambling
I have had the opportunity recently to talk with two of our four local elected officials about the issue of casino gambling. Neither appeared prepared to take a public position; instead, both appeared to be genuine in looking for information on gambling and opinions about it from their constituents. If you have opinions or information on gambling, this would be a good time to contact your Allston-Brighton elected officials to tell them.
State Rep Kevin Honan: 617-722-2470, email, website
State Rep Mike Moran: 617-722-2460, email, website
State Senator Steven Tolman: 617- 722-1280, email, website
District 9 City Councilor Jerry McDermott: 617-635-3113, email, website
Transcript of Candidate Forum on Casino Gambling
The following is the transcript of the candidate remarks on casino gambling at the candidate forum at the Brighton Elks Lodge, October 10, 2007. Audio of this portion of the forum can be listened to here (MP3 format); the full audio links are contained in a previous post.
MODERATOR: All the candidates will get the same general question regarding casino gambling, but each will get a different specific question related to it. I'm going to ask you to answer the general question -- Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? -- in addition to a specific question.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, should slot machines be allowed at the Suffolk Downs racetrack?
COUNCILOR MURPHY: The casino issue is a state-wide issue, it's not a city issue, so let me answer it state-wide. I do support casino gambling. I think we're way behind the eight-ball. In fact, 72% of cars down at Foxwoods have Massachusetts license plates on it, and many of them are seniors who go on bus trips down there. In terms of the slots at the racetracks, that's the way I would have started it. I don't agree with the Governor's plan. I would have had slots up and running at the five racetrack sites -- including the one at Suffolk Downs -- probably this year, and hope to put, maybe, two full-fledged casino -- one in the Middleborough southeast area of the city, and one out west in Worcester, somewhere in that area. But I think we an awful lot of revenue, that could go to a whole host of worthy purposes, to out-of-state concerns. So I do support it.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, should a "destination" casino be built at Suffolk Downs?
MARTIN HOGAN: I personally oppose the gambling casino, because I feel that we are looking for a revenue stream in which we're bringing on something that is not healthy for us [inaudible]. I believe that it will bring in more gambling addiction, I think it will cause more drug and violence problems, and we also are going to be taking police off of the beat to patrol the casinos. We don't need that. We need as many police on the street as we can. As far as "destination," again, I disagree with that. I believe that we have had Las Vegas and Atlantic City -- and Connecticut for the last 20 years or longer -- and I believe that we need to stick with that. I think we need to look for new revenue streams and look for healthy alternatives, not for this.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, what tools can, or should, the City of Boston use to constrain, or block altogether, a possible casino within the city limits?
COUNCILOR FLAHERTY: A destination resort casino holds much promise. It's really a two-fold question if you look at it from the State-wide perspective or if you look at it from the City-perspective. If it can be shown to me, in writing, signed by the appropriate parties, that it will lower our taxes, improve our schools, put more police officers on the streets, and create jobs, then that is something that I can support. A little closer to home in Suffolk Downs, the first thing that needs to happen is that the host community of East Boston needs to be consulted, and that has yet to happen. We have had an announcement of a proposal, and [thus far] no one has been brought to the table to voice their concerns or their opinions about the impacts of having a casino in their backyard. So I would hold up judgment altogether on a destination resort casino until I get the chance to take the temperature of the folks that I represent in East Boston, first and foremost. What tools you can use? The strength of the Council is in their advocacy, working with the elected officials that represent East Boston specifically, working with the community leaders and civic associations, will be the tools that will guide development in a proposed casino.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, what specific concessions would be necessary for you to support building a casino at Suffolk Downs?
COUNCILOR ARROYO: I oppose casino gambling. I think they bring more social problems than solutions. I think that we should be responsible for our own future. We don't have to gamble our future away. If we take charge of our budget, we make sure that there is priority-setting, that do what is needed in the communities, instead of looking at [?enforcement ideas?], not only when there is a victim, after there is a victim. We should concentrate in investing in prevention and intervention so that we faciltate programs that bring people back to work, to productive life, then we will not have to think that we cannot take care of ourselves unless we gamble our future away. I don't that there is a concession that will change my mind.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And if a casino were to be built at Suffolk Downs, how would you anticipate your duties as City Councilor to be affected?
JOHN CONNOLLY: First and foremost, I support casino gambling. I think in a city where we have a resource crunch, particularly have major concerns over safety on our streets, and we need to find a way to get more officers on our streets as part of a way to implement more community policing strategy, that we do need to look at casino gambling to open up a source of revenue. On the destination casino issue, I think that we have to have a full process to hear what East Boston thinks on that. I really fear for the quality-of-life in that neighborhood, without it. Were it to go there? I think the biggest thing you could do as a Councilor-At-Large would be to advocate strongly for the community that would be impacted. Just having been over there this summer, concerns about traffic, concerns about quality-of-life when you've got people leaving the casino at 3 am, 4 am. I also worry for myself, because I can never remember whether to hit or to stay at sixteen.
QUESTION: The general question, also. And residents of Boston average spending $823 annually per capita on the Massachusetts Lottery already. Do we need more or less gambling in the City of Boston?
COUNCILOR YOON: To the general question, I am keeping an open mind about casino gambling. I do listen to a lot of the arguments about economic development and the ways that it can generate public revenue. And I will really have to examine the negative impacts and understand them, because gambling addiction is real. Furthermore, it has been stated, we absolutely have to have a vigorous public process and a debate in East Boston. If you think about if a casino were to be proposed for Allston-Brighton, how would you feel? What would you think is the most important thing to do? It's just to have a vigorous public debate about that. In terms of the State Lottery, as many of us know, it's losing money, and the Speaker has pointed that out, and that is being investigated. This is a long historical precedent. We know that when gambling was illegal, it became an enterprise of the underworld, of the criminal elements, and this is why the State essentially took it over, one of the many reasons. But we also need to have a debate about its appropriateness in terms of the neighborhoods and the city in general.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And also, should the community be required to approve via referendum construction of a casino in Boston?
MATTHEW GEARY: I oppose casino gambling. It's like trying to squeeze blood from stone. Every single time the government's in a revenue crunch they always come down on working people, and increasing taxes on working people. The people who benefit most from casino gambling are the people who own the resorts, who own the casinos... [asked second half of question be repeated]
QUESTION: Should the community be required to approve via referendum construction of a casino in Boston?
MATTHEW GEARY: Yes, I believe in direct democracy, in all its forms. However, when was the last time a community ever got to vote by referendum for any development programs in their neighborhood? The Boston Redevelopment Authority, the Mass Turnpike Authority, the MBTA, all these bodies are run by unelected boards of directors, and the community never has any input. The way it's being proposed -- that if we don't support casino gambling, then it will another toll increase on the turnpike, or it's going to be more fare increases on the MBTA -- [inaudible].
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, if a popular referendum is required, then who should vote on it? Only East Boston and Revere? All of Boston? Suffolk County? Everyone within Route 128?
DAVID WYATT: I think it would be necessary for everyone in the Commonwealth to vote on it, [if it] were it to work. We have an example of a state where we have legalized gambling, and I don't think we would be able to compete in Massachusetts unless we became similar to that state and everything that attracts people to gambling in Nevada, here. I oppose gambling in East Boston. I don't think the Native Americans would be participating in it, and it competes with their stream of revenue which the government has granted them as separate nations in order to address past wrongs. I don't want to compete with them. I want them to get what they deserve.
Some people may call this a state issue, which is true to some extent: the State Legislature and Governor must first approve having casinos of any kind, or even just slot machines, in Massachusetts. Should the State not approve casinos, the Mashpee Wapanoag can also appeal to the Federal government's Bureau of Indian Affairs for approval.
But the issue is closer to home than that. While the state must approve having casinos altogether, local governments must decide whether to welcome, constrain, or block altogether construction of a casino in their community. That's why the candidates were all asked whether they backed a casino in Boston, not whether they backed casino gambling in Massachusetts altogether.
The Boston Globe recently surveyed Massachusetts residents and found 53% support leaning towards legalizing casino gambling in Massachusetts. Despite this, only one-third of respondents had actually made up their mind to support legalizing casino gambling; 40% are undecided for the time being (want more information), and 24% oppose it. A plurality of Massachusetts residents, and a majority of residents within Route 128, wanted any such casino to be in a rural location, i.e., relatively far from the urban Greater Boston area. Governor Deval Patrick's proposal, however, looks to having one of the three resort-style casinos to be located in or near to Boston, with Suffolk Downs (straddling the line between East Boston and Revere) as the odds-on favorite.
Where the Councilor-At-Large Candidates Stand on Casino Gambling
The Boston City Councilor-At-Large candidates expressed opinions all over the map on the issue of casino gambling in the City of Boston.
Councilor Stephen Murphy and challenger John Connolly expressed strong support for casino gambling in Massachusetts, and Murphy went further in wanting slot machines (albeit not a destination casino) at Suffolk Downs within the year. They cited the potential revenue as the justification for allowing casinos. Challenger David Wyatt appeared to be leaning towards casinos in general, but against Suffolk Downs in particular, because he doesn't want anybody competing against the Native Americans' own casinos.
Councilor Felix Arroyo and challengers Martin Hogan and Matthew Geary strongly opposed casino gambling anywhere, including Boston. "We don't have to gamble our future away," said Arroyo, who also cited many social concerns about the negative impacts of gambling on the public. Geary thought that the casino developers would be the main financial beneficiaries, not the public or the government. Hogan saw the inherent conflict due to the added burden of policing the casinos while the city instead needs more police on the streets.
Councilors Michael Flaherty and Sam Yoon were undecided on casinos. Flaherty said that destination casinos "hold much promise," but said that he wanted promises in writing about how the revenue created would guarantee state-wide direct benefits like additional police, school improvements, and job creation. Yoon understood the economic development arguments, but worried about gambling addiction and the possible role of "criminal elements" or the "underworld" in casinos.
Flaherty, Connolly, and Yoon all called for listening closely to residents of East Boston on the issue of a casino at Suffolk Downs. "We absolutely have to have a vigorous public process and a debate in East Boston," said Yoon. Flaherty went so far to say that he would "hold up judgment altogether" until he got the chance to "take the temperature" of the residents in East Boston. Only Councilor Murphy emphasized that the casino issue was one for the State, not the City, to deal with.
What Was Missing From Their Answers?
There were two substantial omissions from the eight candidates' answers. Most remarkable was how no one objected to casino gambling on clearly ethical grounds by saying, "I think gambling is wrong and we as a government shouldn't support it." The Archdiocese of Boston has come out strongly against legalizing casinos, so it surprises me that there weren't any candidates expressing such an objection. Sean Cardinal O'Malley said that "we unequivocally oppose casino gambling in the state." Should the Cardinal deny communion to casino supporters?
Also suprising was that no one saw the role that city government could play in blocking, or at least constraining, the construction of a casino at Suffolk Downs. Local governments have the power of zoning and permitting to make it very difficult to build an unpopular development, yet no candidate seized on this point. Casinos need water, sewer, and electrical lines, roads capable of holding traffic, liquor licenses, entertainment licenses, etc., all of which can be controlled partially or fully by city government. (I note that I have not examined the text of Governor Patrick's bill which might include language over-riding any local ordinances, zoning, etc.) While the State may control the issue of whether or not there can be casinos somewhere in Massachusetts, it will be up to our local elected officials to decide if we should welcome one here in Boston.
I was also amazed that none of the candidates really addressed the issue of whether or not Governor Patrick's analysis of the monetary benefits of legalizing gambling appeared credible. The casinos will necessitate additional public expenditures in roadway access, public safety, etc., and will also likely cause a substantial drop in Massachusetts Lottery revenues, so do we believe there will be a lot of money leftover? It is a good question, but the Governor blocked providing copies to the public of the documents he studied in coming up with his plan.
Allston-Brighton's Elected Officials on Casino Gambling
I have had the opportunity recently to talk with two of our four local elected officials about the issue of casino gambling. Neither appeared prepared to take a public position; instead, both appeared to be genuine in looking for information on gambling and opinions about it from their constituents. If you have opinions or information on gambling, this would be a good time to contact your Allston-Brighton elected officials to tell them.
State Rep Kevin Honan: 617-722-2470, email, website
State Rep Mike Moran: 617-722-2460, email, website
State Senator Steven Tolman: 617- 722-1280, email, website
District 9 City Councilor Jerry McDermott: 617-635-3113, email, website
Transcript of Candidate Forum on Casino Gambling
The following is the transcript of the candidate remarks on casino gambling at the candidate forum at the Brighton Elks Lodge, October 10, 2007. Audio of this portion of the forum can be listened to here (MP3 format); the full audio links are contained in a previous post.
MODERATOR: All the candidates will get the same general question regarding casino gambling, but each will get a different specific question related to it. I'm going to ask you to answer the general question -- Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? -- in addition to a specific question.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, should slot machines be allowed at the Suffolk Downs racetrack?
COUNCILOR MURPHY: The casino issue is a state-wide issue, it's not a city issue, so let me answer it state-wide. I do support casino gambling. I think we're way behind the eight-ball. In fact, 72% of cars down at Foxwoods have Massachusetts license plates on it, and many of them are seniors who go on bus trips down there. In terms of the slots at the racetracks, that's the way I would have started it. I don't agree with the Governor's plan. I would have had slots up and running at the five racetrack sites -- including the one at Suffolk Downs -- probably this year, and hope to put, maybe, two full-fledged casino -- one in the Middleborough southeast area of the city, and one out west in Worcester, somewhere in that area. But I think we an awful lot of revenue, that could go to a whole host of worthy purposes, to out-of-state concerns. So I do support it.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, should a "destination" casino be built at Suffolk Downs?
MARTIN HOGAN: I personally oppose the gambling casino, because I feel that we are looking for a revenue stream in which we're bringing on something that is not healthy for us [inaudible]. I believe that it will bring in more gambling addiction, I think it will cause more drug and violence problems, and we also are going to be taking police off of the beat to patrol the casinos. We don't need that. We need as many police on the street as we can. As far as "destination," again, I disagree with that. I believe that we have had Las Vegas and Atlantic City -- and Connecticut for the last 20 years or longer -- and I believe that we need to stick with that. I think we need to look for new revenue streams and look for healthy alternatives, not for this.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, what tools can, or should, the City of Boston use to constrain, or block altogether, a possible casino within the city limits?
COUNCILOR FLAHERTY: A destination resort casino holds much promise. It's really a two-fold question if you look at it from the State-wide perspective or if you look at it from the City-perspective. If it can be shown to me, in writing, signed by the appropriate parties, that it will lower our taxes, improve our schools, put more police officers on the streets, and create jobs, then that is something that I can support. A little closer to home in Suffolk Downs, the first thing that needs to happen is that the host community of East Boston needs to be consulted, and that has yet to happen. We have had an announcement of a proposal, and [thus far] no one has been brought to the table to voice their concerns or their opinions about the impacts of having a casino in their backyard. So I would hold up judgment altogether on a destination resort casino until I get the chance to take the temperature of the folks that I represent in East Boston, first and foremost. What tools you can use? The strength of the Council is in their advocacy, working with the elected officials that represent East Boston specifically, working with the community leaders and civic associations, will be the tools that will guide development in a proposed casino.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, what specific concessions would be necessary for you to support building a casino at Suffolk Downs?
COUNCILOR ARROYO: I oppose casino gambling. I think they bring more social problems than solutions. I think that we should be responsible for our own future. We don't have to gamble our future away. If we take charge of our budget, we make sure that there is priority-setting, that do what is needed in the communities, instead of looking at [?enforcement ideas?], not only when there is a victim, after there is a victim. We should concentrate in investing in prevention and intervention so that we faciltate programs that bring people back to work, to productive life, then we will not have to think that we cannot take care of ourselves unless we gamble our future away. I don't that there is a concession that will change my mind.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And if a casino were to be built at Suffolk Downs, how would you anticipate your duties as City Councilor to be affected?
JOHN CONNOLLY: First and foremost, I support casino gambling. I think in a city where we have a resource crunch, particularly have major concerns over safety on our streets, and we need to find a way to get more officers on our streets as part of a way to implement more community policing strategy, that we do need to look at casino gambling to open up a source of revenue. On the destination casino issue, I think that we have to have a full process to hear what East Boston thinks on that. I really fear for the quality-of-life in that neighborhood, without it. Were it to go there? I think the biggest thing you could do as a Councilor-At-Large would be to advocate strongly for the community that would be impacted. Just having been over there this summer, concerns about traffic, concerns about quality-of-life when you've got people leaving the casino at 3 am, 4 am. I also worry for myself, because I can never remember whether to hit or to stay at sixteen.
QUESTION: The general question, also. And residents of Boston average spending $823 annually per capita on the Massachusetts Lottery already. Do we need more or less gambling in the City of Boston?
COUNCILOR YOON: To the general question, I am keeping an open mind about casino gambling. I do listen to a lot of the arguments about economic development and the ways that it can generate public revenue. And I will really have to examine the negative impacts and understand them, because gambling addiction is real. Furthermore, it has been stated, we absolutely have to have a vigorous public process and a debate in East Boston. If you think about if a casino were to be proposed for Allston-Brighton, how would you feel? What would you think is the most important thing to do? It's just to have a vigorous public debate about that. In terms of the State Lottery, as many of us know, it's losing money, and the Speaker has pointed that out, and that is being investigated. This is a long historical precedent. We know that when gambling was illegal, it became an enterprise of the underworld, of the criminal elements, and this is why the State essentially took it over, one of the many reasons. But we also need to have a debate about its appropriateness in terms of the neighborhoods and the city in general.
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And also, should the community be required to approve via referendum construction of a casino in Boston?
MATTHEW GEARY: I oppose casino gambling. It's like trying to squeeze blood from stone. Every single time the government's in a revenue crunch they always come down on working people, and increasing taxes on working people. The people who benefit most from casino gambling are the people who own the resorts, who own the casinos... [asked second half of question be repeated]
QUESTION: Should the community be required to approve via referendum construction of a casino in Boston?
MATTHEW GEARY: Yes, I believe in direct democracy, in all its forms. However, when was the last time a community ever got to vote by referendum for any development programs in their neighborhood? The Boston Redevelopment Authority, the Mass Turnpike Authority, the MBTA, all these bodies are run by unelected boards of directors, and the community never has any input. The way it's being proposed -- that if we don't support casino gambling, then it will another toll increase on the turnpike, or it's going to be more fare increases on the MBTA -- [inaudible].
QUESTION: Do you support or oppose casino gambling in the City of Boston? And, specifically, if a popular referendum is required, then who should vote on it? Only East Boston and Revere? All of Boston? Suffolk County? Everyone within Route 128?
DAVID WYATT: I think it would be necessary for everyone in the Commonwealth to vote on it, [if it] were it to work. We have an example of a state where we have legalized gambling, and I don't think we would be able to compete in Massachusetts unless we became similar to that state and everything that attracts people to gambling in Nevada, here. I oppose gambling in East Boston. I don't think the Native Americans would be participating in it, and it competes with their stream of revenue which the government has granted them as separate nations in order to address past wrongs. I don't want to compete with them. I want them to get what they deserve.
BC Task Force Meeting: Tuesday 10/16, at 6:30 pm
BC Task Force Meeting
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
6:30-8:30 pm
Brighton Marine Health Center
77 Warren Street, 3rd floor
Brighton MA 02135
Agenda:
John FitzGerald
Project Manager
Boston Redevelopment Authority
617-918-4267
John.Fitzgerald.bra@cityofboston.gov
Note that this meeting does not appear on the BRA website for Allston-Brighton meetings.
Institutional Master Plan Amendment
At the September 18 meeting of the BC Task Force, BC officials notified residents that theyintend to file an IMPA imminently filed an IMPA on 10/12/07 to provide for use of two buildings, Bishop Peterson Hall and the St. John's Library, that BC purchased in the late summer from the Archdiocese of Boston.
They announced that the IMPA would cover:
According to the previous meeting, BC was intending to have filed the IMPA by now, but I have heard no word of that; hopefully, they will clarify the timetable.
A sticky issue that was raised in the September 18 meeting was housing for the seminarians of the Weston Jesuit School of Theology. The IMPA does not provide for housing of the seminarians, but postpones the issue for the subsequent IMP; in effect, this move blocks the seminarians from using existing housing on the Brighton Campus, like St. Williams Hall, thereby forcing BC into building new housing for them (i.e., next to the Foster Rock).
Another unresolved issue was use of St. Williams Hall in the IMPA. Since the IMPA will move occupancy (offices, classrooms) of those seminarians from St. Williams Hall to Bishop Peterson Hall, theoretically this will leave St. Williams Hall vacant -- unless a different occupancy is included in the IMPA. At least one BC official had stated informally in the past that administrative staff at More Hall would be moving into St. Williams Hall, but this point was not raised at the September 18 meeting.
Student Behavior
BC officials have been playing full-court press with trying to bring off-campus student behavior under control -- and mollifying the neighbors about it -- prior to submitting their big IMP later this year. At the September 18 meeting of the BC Task Force, BC Vice President for Governmental and Student Affairs Tom Keady, Jr., stated twice that BC itself has a "zero-tolerance" policy for off-campus student behavior; this was further clarification of previous statements, such as by Dean Paul Chebator in an August 29, 2007 letter to students, that "the Boston Police Department has instituted a 'zero tolerance policy' and will be enforcing the law aggressively throughout the year."
Hopefully the update at the October 16 meeting will include answers to:
Allston/Brighton Scholarships
These scholarships are part of the community benefits from previous BC institutional master plan. Ten new scholarships are awarded each year to qualifying students who reside in Allston-Brighton. The definition of "qualifying" was described in a newsletter, distributed to residents in August 2007, as having at least $10,000 in financial need. While that August newsletter named the most recent recipients, previous recipients have not been named; hopefully, that will be corrected at the October 16 meeting.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
6:30-8:30 pm
Brighton Marine Health Center
77 Warren Street, 3rd floor
Brighton MA 02135
Agenda:
- IMPA -- Update
- Student Behavior -- Update
- Allston/Brighton Scholarship Program
John FitzGerald
Project Manager
Boston Redevelopment Authority
617-918-4267
John.Fitzgerald.bra@cityofboston.gov
Note that this meeting does not appear on the BRA website for Allston-Brighton meetings.
Institutional Master Plan Amendment
At the September 18 meeting of the BC Task Force, BC officials notified residents that they
They announced that the IMPA would cover:
- Extension of the BC master plan zoning overlay to include these two buildings;
- Renovations of the two buildings; and
- Occupancy of the two buildings for institutional use beginning in late 2008.
A sticky issue that was raised in the September 18 meeting was housing for the seminarians of the Weston Jesuit School of Theology. The IMPA does not provide for housing of the seminarians, but postpones the issue for the subsequent IMP; in effect, this move blocks the seminarians from using existing housing on the Brighton Campus, like St. Williams Hall, thereby forcing BC into building new housing for them (i.e., next to the Foster Rock).
Another unresolved issue was use of St. Williams Hall in the IMPA. Since the IMPA will move occupancy (offices, classrooms) of those seminarians from St. Williams Hall to Bishop Peterson Hall, theoretically this will leave St. Williams Hall vacant -- unless a different occupancy is included in the IMPA. At least one BC official had stated informally in the past that administrative staff at More Hall would be moving into St. Williams Hall, but this point was not raised at the September 18 meeting.
Student Behavior
BC officials have been playing full-court press with trying to bring off-campus student behavior under control -- and mollifying the neighbors about it -- prior to submitting their big IMP later this year. At the September 18 meeting of the BC Task Force, BC Vice President for Governmental and Student Affairs Tom Keady, Jr., stated twice that BC itself has a "zero-tolerance" policy for off-campus student behavior; this was further clarification of previous statements, such as by Dean Paul Chebator in an August 29, 2007 letter to students, that "the Boston Police Department has instituted a 'zero tolerance policy' and will be enforcing the law aggressively throughout the year."
Hopefully the update at the October 16 meeting will include answers to:
- What are the procedures BC and Boston Police will be using when they break up a party, i.e., how to they decide when students enter the BC disciplinary system vs. the municipal system?
- How many students have entered into the BC disciplinary process over off-campus behavior since the beginning of the academic year?
- How many students have been arrested by Boston Police?
- How many problem houses have been identified by BC and Boston police, and (roughly) where are they?
- Has the electronic ID scanning device been initiated for use by BC police?
- Is Keady still working the midnight-3am shift?
Allston/Brighton Scholarships
These scholarships are part of the community benefits from previous BC institutional master plan. Ten new scholarships are awarded each year to qualifying students who reside in Allston-Brighton. The definition of "qualifying" was described in a newsletter, distributed to residents in August 2007, as having at least $10,000 in financial need. While that August newsletter named the most recent recipients, previous recipients have not been named; hopefully, that will be corrected at the October 16 meeting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
