Hey, there! Log in / Register
Ennui in JP: Few people running for neighborhood-council seats
By adamg on Fri, 09/27/2013 - 9:42am
The Jamaica Plain Gazette reports only 12 people signed up to run for the 20 total seats on the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council in its October elections. But don't worry, drama fans: One of the people now guaranteed a return trip to the council is Benjamin Day, the guy responsible for that ever popular guessing game: Is the council a public agency or not?
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Can't some of the people at
Can't some of the people at ArchBoston pack that council then? If no one else is running.....
No thanks, those people are losers.
nt
nobody's running because of the lawsuit
The next council will be responsible for Day's lawsuit.
Make sure you say hello to him the next time you see him in JP:
http://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/430_10101062219819765_95...
Between him and Ken Sazama, it's no wonder nobody wants to be on the council.
*How* many people?
Just how many people actually live in JP? A 20 person council sounds like overkill and also guaranteed gridlock...What do they think they are? The US Congress?
20 people?
I'm surprised too--that sounds huge. And while it seems as if many people in JP have had ideas about hitting refresh on the council, I can imagine that most of them don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. Debates about the council's role and legitimacy and the past couple of years of crazy, agenda-driven hijinks from Whole Foods to this lawsuit...who would want to join this crew?
That's Because it's a Joke
The council is a joke. They don't care about the community, they care about their own narrow vision of how JP should be, and stuffing their own pockets.
Anyone else find it an enormous conflict of interest that the council president is paying himself to file lawsuits on behalf of the council, because I do. He should go to jail for fraud and embezzlement. Which I'd go and tell him, if they'd inform the public of their open meetings more than an hour in advance, and publish their meeting minutes.
The idea of this neighborhood council is great: represent the neighborhood and act on behalf of it. Problem is, they don't do it. The vast majority of the residents of JP have absolutely no problem with Whole Foods. Didn't stop the council from trying to hold them hostage. The vast majority of the residents of JP think that a development with 50% more affordable housing than is required by law is just fine. Not the council, though. They'll sue, and threaten and blackmail, all so Mr. Day can keep himself and his law firm busy.
It's disgusting, it's broken and it's fraudulent. That's why no one believes in it, or wants to be a part of it.
Wiesner, not Day
In a previous comment, I stated that Mr. Day is the attorney who is paying himself out of the JPNC coffers while being a member. It is Jeffrey Wiesner who is doing this, not Day.
Jeffrey Wiesner's response
I thought the comment about me being paid was amusing enough to respond to. First, the JPNC has no "coffers," a decision made by the Council long ago to ensure that money would not influence its decisions. So, the legal effort is a pro bono one. You seem really passionate, if not informed. I would recommend taking your passion beyond anonymous message writing on the internet to actual engagement with your local democratic institutions. If you don't like the decisions of the Council it's pretty easy to join, and your views could be implemented in the real world. Think about it.
I'm a JP resident who would
I'm a JP resident who would love to come to your meetings, learn more about the council and let my opinions be known. Please let everyone know when and where your next meeting(s) will be. No, seriously. When are they? We'd all LOVE to go but you have to admit it looks a super shady that you don't make public meetings publicly known.
JPNC Meetings Dates
JPNC meetings of the full Council are the last Tuesday of every month, usually at the First Baptist Church on Centre Street. Our website (JPNC.org) says this, and my understanding is that the date and time of the meeting is published in both the JP Patch and the JP Gazette. If you send me an email [email protected], I also believe that there is an email list you can be put on which will inform you of the date and time of the meeting. The various subcommittees of the JPNC (Public Service, Zoning) also have a set time each month, e.g., Public Service is the first Tuesday of every month. I just looked at the website and it appears at least many of the subcommittees dates are posted on the left hand side of the web version, at least, of the of the website. So, it sounds like there is some frustration over our dissemination of the meeting dates, which I will certainly bring up to the Council and see if we can better inform people, but there is no intention of making it difficult for people to come. We much prefer to have people at our meetings.
I have only been on the Council, or frankly even terribly aware of the Council, for the past two years. I joined because I did not like the way the Whole Foods matter was handled by the Council. Conflating 161 South Huntington with Whole Foods would be a mistake, in my view. But, since my arrival on the Council I haven't seen anything even slightly "shady." It's a group of people volunteering their time, some have been on the Council for 25 years, some have been there for two years, trying to guide the community. We all agree and disagree about issues and try to listen to the community as best as we can to chart its future. If there is a segment of the community that believes it is not being listened to, I suggest that segment hasn't come to the meetings to be heard. I frankly do not want to be making decisions without the input of community members, and I am pretty certain the other Council members do not wish to be doing that either. I encourage you all to get involved. I didn't know what to expect when I joined the Council, but have found it to be a very interesting experience being a part of a local democratic institution. If anyone doesn't think it is democratic enough, he or she should come to the meetings or join the Council and change it.
So...
Why do you think so many people in JP seem to have similar reservations about the council? I still find it hard to imagine that a coalition of twenty people have made the decisions that the council is now famous for.
I think the people who have
I think the people who have reservations about the Council are the people who don't come to Council meetings or get to know Council members. I am also quite confident that the reservations are fueled in large part by media reports about the Council, which are often (if not mostly) written with a peculiar bais against the Council. But, I don't want to speak in generalities. Let's take the consistent tendency of the media and some commenters on this site to conflate the Whole Foods issue with the decision of the Council to file a lawsuit to challenge the zoning variances at 161 South Huntington. What needs to be understood first is that all of the institutions set up to review the development in JP unanimously rejected it. Those institutions are: The JPNC zoning committee (which is not the same as the JPNC full Council. The Zoning Committee has many members on it from the community that are not on the Council), the JP Pond Association, and the IAG (the Independent Advisory Group, which is a group of residents that is set up by the Boston Redevelopment Authority to review large projects and give its opinion). There were also several large community meetings about the project (I attended two or three, but I believe there were more). I don't have the numbers but a significant majority of those in attendance were opposed to the project as it was proposed. Despite all of this opposition from the institutions of JP (which, of course, are made up of residents of JP) and the general opposition to the project, the Zoning Board of Appeal, without even discussing the opposition at its meeting (I was there), simply approved it.
The media reports about the suit to challenge the Zoning Board of Appeals decision paint a very different picture, in my view. (I would be interested how others have come to view the situation and how those views were formed.) The media could have written stories with headlines such as: All JP Institutions Oppose Project but City Ignores Those Institutions and Goes Ahead Anyway. Instead the reports, again in my view, told a very different story.
Here is my question to the critics of the JPNC: Why wouldn't you want to have a local, democratic institution that allows local residents some ability to control what happens in JP? You may not like the people on the JPNC or their decisions on a particular issue, but if that is the case join the JPNC or come to the meetings and your views will be considered and may very well determine how matters are decided. This is what democracy is about, right?
Here are a few issues we have
Here are a few issues that I, and many of my neighbors in JP have with what the council does, frequently:
- The council's refusal to endorse a project that doesn't at least double the amount of low income housing that is required by law. This stifles development by putting unnecessary burdens on those who are trying to build in JP. The vast majority of developments proposed for JP go above and beyond the minimum required affordable housing numbers, and yet the JPNC demands more. The proposed parcel U development at Forest Hills comes to mind. The Council demands 1/3 affordable housing, the law states that the developer is only required to build 13%. The developer compromised and committed to 25% affordable units, but the council was not satisfied, so now the lot remains empty.
- What is seemingly the councils effort to intentionally depress Jamaica Plain as a neighborhood. Specifically during the Whole Foods debate, it was frequently cited that a Whole Foods coming to the neighborhood would increase property values, as though this is a bad thing. As an individual who owns my home in JP, to see the council advocate and actively take action to keep property values down is ridiculous, frustrating and, frankly, dumb.
- The fact that the council concerns itself with stifling development and progress in the neighborhood instead of addressing real issues, like violence, drug use and underfunded and/or closing schools in the neighborhood. These are the things that people in JP want the council attending to. Not holding developers hostage to unrealistic affordable housing numbers.
As a member of this community I can tell you, in speaking with others, that the issues above are some of many that have disenfranchised many of us with the council. There may be a vocal minority who agree that property values should intentionally be depressed, that developers should be extorted and that important issues within our community should be ignored so we can fight progress, but most of us do not.
I, of course, cannot speak on
I, of course, cannot speak on behalf of the Council, but will give you my own views on the points that you raise.
First, here is my understanding with regard to affordable housing requirements of the City of Boston. There is no "law" requiring affordable housing. I believe the Boston Redevelopment Authority requests that a developer include a certain percentage of affordable housing and then conditions approval upon the developer meeting those requirements. The JPNC has it's own policy of requiring more affordable housing and many developers meet it. You have a perfectly legitimate interest in viewing the JPNC's efforts to push developers to create more affordable units as overreaching. Others, in my view, have a perfectly legitimate interest in doing what can be done to stem the tide of market forces that could drive up real estate values to the point at which many long time residents of Jamaica Plain could no longer live in the community. You may believe that such market forces should be allowed to operate without any resistance. Others believe that government should play a role in ensuring that whole communities are not uprooted because of those market forces. It may be that you wish to live in a community that only allows those who make a certain amount of money to live. Others (especially those who have lived in Jamaica Plain with their families for generations) do not think that, but rather wish to live in a diverse community with people of all income levels. If the goal is to maintain that diversity, there are few tools at hand. Barry Bluestone, a noted economist at Northeastern University, has written that the economy of Boston is going to suffer if more affordable housing is not provided in the city. So, as a property owner myself, I appreciate wanting to maximize the value of your investment, but from a public policy perspective there are competing values.
Second, and related to the above, the Whole Foods debate was a complex one. Although I was not on the Council at the time, and in fact joined the Council because of my disagreement with the manner in which the Whole Foods issue was handled, I came to much better appreciate the passion and the interests of the most vocal portion of the community. High Lo was an institution beyond a grocery store in Jamaica Plain for many, and for sucessive generations. This is not something I could have possibly understood or appreciated until speaking with those involved. Before joining the Council, I sat on the sidelines and read the shallow media reports and frankly scoffed at what I perceived from my uninvolved vantage point of a Council having gone off the rails. My perspective changed once I began to appreciate the perspective of those who were so against it. That does not mean I now don't believe Whole Foods should have come in. But, now I understand the complexity of it, and recognize the interests that motivated the fight.
Finally, you say these are the issues that have "disinfrnchised" you with the Council. Well, that's not true. You haven't been disenfranchised. There are seats open on the Council, there are meeting to go to, there are Council members to engage and to try to convince of your point of view. This sounds like a platitude, but democracy doesn't work without the involvement of people.