Hey, there! Log in / Register
City councilor faces charges for Friday crash in Jamaica Plain
By adamg on Mon, 07/03/2023 - 5:11pm
WBUR reports City Councilor Kendra Lara (Jamaica Plain, West Roxbury), was cited for driving an unregistered car with a revoked license, no insurance and an expired inspection sticker for a crash into a house on Centre Street Friday afternoon. Both she and her young son were injured.
Neighborhoods:
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
Yet another example
Rules for thee and not for me.
Well, no
She's being charged for breaking those rules, so it's not an example of that, at all.
Well
I'm fairly certain that the Boston City Council does not have any control of Chapter 90 of the Massachusetts General Laws, and it sure looks like she is facing the prospect of consequences for her alleged unlawful acts, so it's almost like our imperfect system does still work much of the time.
We’ll see if it all sticks
Connected people always have a way out
it quite literally is not
as she is being charged lol
Missing the point
She has a long history of violations so therefore she felt the rules did not apply to her. Being in a position of power further bolstered her to feel like she could do what she wanted. The fact that she is an elected official did nothing to change her thinking about following the rules.
My statement stands.
eh
that’s conjecture on your part. i am in no position of power yet i haven’t gotten my car inspected since before the pandemic.
let me know if she beats the charges and doesn’t resign, then i think you’d have a point.
Different
Inspection is a simple citation. Unregistered, uninsured (which she will blame on her boyfriend, obviously, how could she possibly have known that? /s) is completely different. That car had no business being on the road, and I would venture to guess neither one of those things happened the day of this accident.
Revoked license is the major issue here that she will have to explain (she won't really, this will magically disappear even though courts aren't equitable!). She received notice multiple times that her license was suspended...then revoked and she continued to drive.
You just described to a T
T for Trump. So get over the pessimism, cynicism, The World is Coming to an End bs.
Welcome to humanity where laws and rules are rarely applied equally. It's crappy reality.
But have the courage to admit when that doesn't happen instead of a knee-jerk reaction that does no good for anyone.
There should be a dangerousness hearing
She can't drive safely, yet puts her kids in a car and drives them. Taking away her license has not been enough to keep her from driving.
So, will there be any way to keep her from driving other than jailing her pending trial?
People like this will continue to make it everyone else's fault/their "right" to drive even after they kill somebody unless they are stopped.
I'd say it's more of an example
of how our society doesn't particularly care about laws around cars or dangerous driving until someone actually gets hurt AND it actually makes the news for whatever reason.
Heck, I'm genuinely surprised that this is leading to so much vitriol from the UHub commentariat - I guess hatred of Boston city councilors outweighs the usual "we can't possibly say that a driver did anything wrong until an exhaustive Senate investigation was done, and even then we should just write it off as something that could happen to anyone".
You must have needed a dozen bales of hay
To build that strawman.
The criticism around here centers almost entirely on the facts which are established indisputably -- Kendra Lara was driving an unregistered, uninsured car that she wasn't legally permitted to operate because her driver's license had been revoked. Furthermore, she violated the law by failing to properly restrain a child in the car, her son. There's a bit of speculation about how one ends up in a porch if operating a vehicle at 25 mph or below, but really all the other facts are damning enough.
And politicians deserve every bit of vitriol aimed at them when they flagrantly violate the law. When you run for that job, you'd better understand that part of the role is to act as a role model for the rest of the public. Don't like that scrutiny? Don't run.
Her license had been revoked for nearly a decade!!! Was she actually driving illegally all that time?
that’s not what a straw man argument is
and it’s not a defense of Lara to point out that there is selective outrage about motor vehicle infractions around here.
just look at all the tortured language around what amounts to her driving without a license and registration. you guys have paid thesaurus dot com’s ad bills for this month.
Anyone know what her license was revoked for?
And for how long?
I assume they were not paying property taxes on the vehicle too? Even though they were driving it around on public streets
.
.
?
?
Multiple infractions, blew off a court hearing in CT
Her license was revoked in 2014 according to a Herald article.
Also from that article:
Nothing on the driving record is out of the ordinary, said Attorney Brian Simoneau, an expert on matters before the Registry of Motor Vehicles.
Simoneau said Lara’s driving record is “run of the mill.” But he said more information on the failure to appear in court or for a trial in Connecticut might shed light on why Lara’s license was revoked in 2014.
“There’s nothing glaring,” he told the Herald. “I don’t think there’s anything really particularly noteworthy.”
Simoneau said one oddity on the record shows Lara got a Massachusetts ID card in 2022 instead of clearing up any potential issues in Connecticut and pursuing a driver’s license here.
“Why wouldn’t you just reinstate your license?” he said. “She would need to reinstate her right to drive in Connecticut and then provide proof of clearance to the Massachusetts registry, and then the Massachusetts registry would allow her to reinstate in Massachusetts.”
She needs to resign
That's four traffic violations in just one incident, not even including reckless operation causing personal injury and property damage (which she probably should also be charged with). Not setting a good example at all.
I'm not so sure traffic violations ...
Warrant a resignation ... is it shifty behavior, sure but she didn't grab a pu$$y
If it’s true, I do think
If it’s true, I do think pressure to resign is warranted. It’s incredibly poor judgment at best and - depending on the reason for suspension - possibly also callous or narcissistic disregard for public safety.
If that’s the decision-making and risk management used in their personal capacity, I can’t imagine anything better is brought to bear in their professional work when other people’s fate and the city’s limited resources are impacted.
Her driving is dangerous
And yet she keeps doing it.
If she were shooting a gun in the air, would there be a question?
The state needs to start take motor vehicle misbehavior more seriously given how many people are killed.
She ain’t gonna resign
The Globe is practically brushing this under the rug.
In the end, she’ll be re-elected and nothing more will be said until she is charged with something else down the road.
What?
What specifically are you accusing The Globe of doing here?
As a print reader
I found the headline “Councilor, son likely to recover after crash” along with the subheadline “Driver cited, police say in redacted report” an interesting choice. The headline on the continuation, “Councilor, son expected to recover fully after car struck house” was another fascinating way they obscured things. I mean, wasn’t it established that she was driving at the time of the crash.
I suppose they’ll eventually run an article on who this mysterious driver was, but I’m not holding my breath on it.
You know the internet exists
I have to imagine your print subscription (you aren't going out any paying retail prices for a paper 7 days per week, are you?) has digital access and you could see that the print story you cite has more clarity online, perhaps updated after it went to print, and you might also see that it was the 2nd story on the crash they had written and published online. The first story, from 7/1, even had the headline "Boston City Councilor Kendra Lara crashes car into Jamaica Plain house with son in backseat"
The story you are citing, currently starts with
To me, that establishes positively that Lara was driving, and while the police will not identify the driver, they would release other info about the person who was driving.
Actually, now that I'm thinking of it, I just pulled up the e-paper for 7/3 when your story ran in print and the lede was the same as it exists online currently, so they did put in print the identity of the driver right in the lede, and the second paragraph includes info from Lara's Chief of Staff that further confirms identity and circumstances.
Just to be clear here, are you actually accusing the Globe of not positively identifying her as the driving in print? Unless the e-paper does not match print, which it is supposed to match, then that is an incorrect claim. You can't put every detail in a headline, or it wouldn't be a headline...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/06/30/metro/boston-city-councilor-lara-...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/07/02/metro/boston-city-councilor-hit-h...
What is this internet thing?
Yes, I saw the lede, as I read the story, but at the end of the day, they were awfully circumspect with the headline. Even the second link you give makes it appear she was merely the victim of the accident per the headline.
Or are you saying headlines aren’t important?
circumspect is what a newspaper is supposed to be
the job is to report the events using confirmed information, otherwise it ceases to be reporting and becomes opinion instead. i think you know this.
I'd argue
The media often practices selective circumspection, based on their biases.
Again, I believe that it was established early on that Lara was driving the car. The Globe chose the headlines they chose. Were it Mary Tamer or Frank Baker behind the wheel, the headline would have been different.
Non-disprovable
What would the headline be for either of these individuals crashing their car? We can't refute your assertion of what the headline would be in a hypothetical scenario like that, but that doesn't mean we must accept them as true just because.
RTFA
Pro-tip: Those long paragraphs below the subhead ALSO contain quite a bit of information. You should try reading those too and then you'll be less confused about what the article says.
Um
I think you missed the part where I mentioned that I read the article, in print.
It's totally strange that your print edition hasn't updated
More information brings more detailed reporting. Early reports did not include the details we now have, no doubt your static Globe subscription went to press when the information was still foggy.
Do you mean the Kamchatka Globe?
This has been on the first page of the web version of the Boston Globe for the past several days.
Dangerous parenting
She was driving an uninsured vehicle without a license and her 7 year old child was not in a proper seat. Both were injured. The car she “swerved to avoid” was apparently parked and not moving. The speed limit is 25 like on almost all Boston streets, and if she was driving anywhere near that limit, how could she plow through a fence and into a house? I think the DCF should be involved, not to remove the child but to keep a watchful eye on her future parenting decisions. This appears to be really reckless behavior endangering and injuring her young child.
The car seat issue is a hard one
The kid was belted and in a seat, but responding officers claim it wasn’t the proper type. A lot of well meaning parents might be guilty of the same.
As for driving dangerously without a license in an unregistered, uninsured, and uninspected car, there’s no excuse for that. Picking the wrong car seat is the least of the issues.
Should she get a driver?
Like the Mayor? Wait... Nevermind.
I'd like to know what the revoked license is about.
Just when Mayor Wu is heading
Just when Mayor Wu is heading up Beacon Hill to grovel for rent control and more liquor licenses, the city has this embarrassment.
1+1=3
Yes, this is an absolute embarrassment for the specific member of the city council.
Do you want to explain the math calculation you have run to connect the mayor and this councilor?
Kendra Lara needs to resign
Kendra Lara has proven she is unfit to represent D6. She has knowingly been breaking the law for many years while driving with revoked license. We were all very lucky that she did not cause more injury with her reckless behavior.
prepare for outrage
I don't know what her record is, but a high proportion of that type of charges are dismissed upon paying court costs and fulfilling other conditions.
Guilty findings and probation or short incarcerations are only imposed after repeated contumacious violations.
In Lara's case, the injury of the child and the property damage are aggravating factors, so will be dealt with a bit more sternly, but don't expect a trip to South Bay.
Exactly
If we incarcerate everyone that does this, the state would be broke.
She should spend some time behind bars
Maybe a couple days, maybe a couple of weeks - seems to be the only thing that will get through to her since she can't seem to either 1) stop driving, and 2) stop blaming others for her endangering her kids and the public.
Jail isn't what I want for her
but I don't think she should still be holding a position of public trust after this.
Something something higher standard
So now we have ethics violations Arroyo hanging on to his spot, and licenseless Lara holding onto hers. Whatever happened to holding officials to a higher standard?
We need better candidates
And we also needs better muckraking journalists to do the hard and boring work of really digging into someone's background and asking lots of specific questions.
It's aggravating that local politicians seem to be asked mostly about national and social issues that will be outside of the purview of their office anyway. (And most city councilors in Massachusetts, Boston included, have little actual authority anyway.)
You're not wrong
At the time Kendra Lawless was elected to the City Council, in 2021, she had been breaking several laws on a daily basis for years and years - since 2014, before her son was even born.
How is it that no journalists bothered to ask the most obvious questions? What would she have had to do to catch their attention?
I guess we know now - drive her car into a house.
Possible accident report
Possible accident report description:
The house was approaching.
I was attempting to swerve out of its way when it struck my front end.
problem is judgment of activists
Boston political activists fall under three rough categories, which individually may overlap:
1. state and city government employees and union members whose primary motivation is to protect and expand their benefits and livelihoods from city government. The Patrolmen's Association, the Teachers' Union, the Laborers' Union, IBEW, etc. These people support whoever will give them what they want.
2. "Progressives" who have a slate of issues, some out of reach of any power of city government. These people look at the race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference of candidates and their poses on such crucial city issues as the Gaza Strip and drag performances in elementary schools.
3. Neighborhood association members. These people are often NIMBYs. They also want local park and library renovations. Some have kids that they want to go to Latin School. Your West Roxbury, Neponset, Roslindale, Charlestown, S. Boston etc conservatives would fall in here and often would be in category (1) too.
All of these categories decide their endorsements or opponents on narrow grounds. A candidate which checks the boxes gets full support, whether they have experience, personal qualities or not.
What I really don’t understand
Is the perspective of the voter who prizes candidate ideology - and by that, I really just mean regurgitating the same buzzwords and pieties - over actual competence, experience, etc.
Full disclosure, I did not support Arroyo for DA and do not support his political agenda. But for those that did, setting aside all his misdeeds of the past, how in holy hell is three years of past relevant experience sufficient for the roll of Suffolk DA? At least Rollins had a resume, right?
Yah, I know this is about Lara and not Arroyo, but it’s kinda the same old story.
Well
Tangentially, your confusion over this might explain why so many jumped the gun and thought progressives would excuse Lara’s actions. I’m not going to stop supporting bike lanes just because Lara is an idiot.
Easy arguments to refute
1. In the US ALL unions exist for the benefit of respective members. Good for members but sometimes not so good for everyone else. Whether the employment is government or private is irrelevant.
And to imply that the police union is in any way "progressive" is silly.
The attempt to criticize progressive activists by pretending that only government unions do what all unions do fails since unions led by liberals or conservatives all exist for the same reason.
2. Progressives look beyond their local issues. Since culture warrior conservatives base their local choices on the pretense of global horrors (oh my god, Sally has two mothers, we can't acknowledge that in school) this fails because this idea of a slate of issues that go beyond local concerns is very much a dog whistle for culture warrior conservatives. Prime examples are how national organizations are pushing culture warriors to be elected to local school boards.
3. At least your argument admits that to be a neighborhood NIMBY political leaning is irrelevant (which is oddly admitted parathentically regarding item 1).
So the question what was the point? A mishmash of failing logic for the purpose of putting down "progressives?" As Don the Culture Warrior Conman would say, "Sad."
Where did I say police unions were progressive?
I put the interested unions and "progressives" in different categories of activists.
Activist and progressive are not synonymous
Tip was on target.
All politics are local. But like good literature the local stands in also for the state and national. So criticizing weighing both local concerns and larger concerns not only makes no sense but it is myopic and narrow minded.
However, a person's character does matter. Driving without a license, without insurance, without protection for a child raise serious questions about the person's choices. Questions serious enough for me to have to wonder why I would vote for her reelection if she chooses to run.
Should she resign? Given that not all politicians who violate laws are expected to resign the question is what standards apply?
On the other hand I am glad that Boston city councilor elections are bi-annual. Which happens to mean this year!
Question
So, is Ms. Lara the City Council version of Dianne Wilkerson, but without the bra stuffing?
No.
Her conduct here is bad (I'd be in favor of her resigning and if she doesn't I likely won't be voting for her for re-election), but there's a difference between bad personal conduct unrelated to her job and blatant political corruption. Wilkerson's actions are MUCH more damning with regard to her fitness for office.
She should have to appear
She should have to appear before Theodoric of York.