The NCNA Zoom meeting began at 7:30 PM with all four of our City Councilors and 30+ NCNA members in attendance.

Following the agenda, Councilor Marco Laredo opened the meeting with a summary of recent events regarding Village Center Zoning and the MBTA. Communities Law. After much debate, the Council passed a compromise led by President Susan Albright and Councilor Leonard Gentile. The number of potential units was reduced from 9,400 to 8,700, and several whole villages were removed from the plan. The final vote was 22 in favor, 1 absent, and 1 against. Councilor Laredo emphasized that the planning department must now do an economic viability study, and the state may yet come back with questions and ask Newton to do things differently. The comment was made that since some villages were excluded, those remaining allow the Village Center Zoning effort to be regarded as a pilot program, which, depending on its results, may or may not be expanded to include the entire city in the future. The vote did make the December 31 deadline to be counted in compliance with the MBTA Communities Act.

When asked how this vote impacted Newton Corner, Councilor Laredo replied that since our village is not served by transit as defined by the state, i.e., it has no train or Green Line stop, it was not included in the MBTA Act.

Councilor Alison Leary commented that since the Village Center zoning preceded the MBTA, she felt it was a natural fit with the MBTA Law. Looking ahead — there is a need to reevaluate Newton Corner and rethink its potential for affordable housing. However, she noted that the city and state are both in holding patterns because of escalating construction costs and supply chain issues. 2500 units in the city, approved for development with the expectation that they would be built, have been slowed or stalled. The Councilors agreed that we will see significant construction once the economy changes.

Councilor Laredo also raised the issue of transportation as a critical factor in Newton Corner’s development. He stated that the current MBTA service — with buses every 15 to 20 minutes during rush hour is unacceptable. Unfortunately, the City Council has almost no control over transportation; that authority is at the state level. The names and contact information for our state representatives can be found on the Newton Corner Neighborhood website at https://www.newtoncornerneighborhood.com/newtoninfo

Councilor John Oliver observed that we did rezone or up-zone for 25% growth, which is significant. However, projects that get stalled mid-construction can negatively impact village centers. It might be wise to pause activity now to see how we recover from this pseudo-recession.

Councilor Alison Leary addressed the issue of our overwhelmed stormwater system and whether any mitigation can be done. Stormwater is a significant long-term problem with multiple aspects to it. In the short term, people can clean off-street drains covered with leaves. In the longer term, we need to rethink development patterns and recognize that the more impervious surfaces we build, the more runoff there will be. The city passed a significant overhaul of the stormwater ordinance this past year. We must continue to think creatively about how we can address this issue and keep water on site. For example, permeable technology would work for residential driveways but not commercial trucks.

Councilor Leary also noted that Josh Ostroff, the City’s Director of Transportation Planning, will leave at the month’s end to become the MBTA’s Director of Capital Program Planning.

Councilor Maria Scibelli-Greenberg reported on several development initiatives that have raised concern in Newton Corner. The property at 35 Wesley Street has been derelict for some time, but the demolition waiver was recently approved, and progress is being made on a new design. At 41 Washington Street, the attorney for the developer notified Councilor Greenberg that his client had asked the design team to explore an alternative site plan to address at least some of the concerns regarding water, density, and lack of open space raised by members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. He anticipates the development team will take several months to complete that process.

Lastly, 447 Centre Street, on the corner of Centre and Richardson, was, until recently, the site of a liquor store. It has been sold and will be developed as medical offices. The point was made that Newton Corner already has many medical offices — not all of which seem to have been successful. The recent closing of Brigham and Women’s medical building, for example, was attributed to a lack of patient traffic. The neighborhood had hoped that a more community-friendly use would have been made of 447 Centre Street since the South-of-the-Pike portion of our community has very little retail space. Councilor Oliver suggested we invite John Sisson to discuss how to incentivize neighborhood-oriented development in Newton Corner. Councilor Laredo noted that while there isn’t enough space to do an Austin Street-type development on the south side of the pike, there is adequate space on the north side, which already has some viable businesses. This is not a question of changing zoning per se but thinking about what to do to attract businesses. City improvements, such as making sidewalk areas more appealing and adding places to sit and trees, would be a practical first step.

Nate Gibson spoke about his long-running quest to get feedback from the Department of Transportation on rotary traffic proposals. He also noted that 28 street lights were out, at least half of them since early fall. Councilor Leary said she would look into the problem and added that to make this a business-friendly neighborhood, people have to be able to walk around it.

The issue of increased traffic along Galen Street due to new building construction was discussed, and Councilor Leary offered to take the initiative to coordinate with the Watertown City Council about this matter.

The Teacher Contract Negotiation was our final topic for the evening. Invitations to speak on this issue were extended to both teacher representatives from the Parent Educator Collaborative and Ward 1 School Committee representative Rajeev Parlikar. Unfortunately, Mr. Parlikar could not attend the meeting and has asked to address these issues in person at the next NCNA meeting. Consequently, the meeting notes below only present the testimony of the teachers who spoke at the meeting. Please know that I would have preferred to have been able to present both sides of this discussion, and I apologize for not being able to do so here.

PEC representative Sue Cohen presented her past history of negotiating school contracts and contrasted it with the present. She commented that she had negotiated with Councilor Laredo when he was on the School Committee and that although those negotiations were not always pleasant, Marc was “tough but fair…a lot of good gardening got done.”... To paraphrase her remarks: While the negotiations could be tough on some issues — they were hard on the problem, not on the people involved because we had the same goal — to reach outcomes that benefitted all. This was “Interest-Based Bargaining.” Things have shifted with these negotiations, however. These involve a different type of bargaining she has not experienced before. While it began as “interest-based,” — once we reached tentative agreements, the dialogue changed. It became “Distributive Bargaining,” i.e., zero-sum bargaining — in which one side can only win if the other loses. This came about when the School Committee wrapped all proposals into one big package. Now we have to accept all in order to get anything. This feels like a breach of trust. We voted for “No Confidence” in the Mayor and School Committee. This is a serious vote and not to be taken lightly.

PEC representative Jane Frantz spoke about how the “Package” deal is perceived to change the status of teachers and their autonomy in managing their free time. Again, to paraphrase: Within the package, there is a “Time and Learning” agreement for each of the three levels, which outlines how educators use their time throughout the day. The School Committee used to treat teachers as professionals but now does not. The new agreement leaves little time for educators. It removes their flexibility during their release time, which is usually their prep time. At the elementary level, this means that on Early-Release days, when teachers typically spent time with colleagues planning units together, the new language grants principals very broad discretion regarding how teachers can use that time. For instance, it includes “required” meetings called at the principal’s discretion but doesn’t define them. This is of great concern because it takes time away from the educator’s most important work, i.e., being ready for students. At Middle and High Schools, it increases the duties teachers must take on when not in class. In short, “The Package” reduces opportunities for time with students and impacts how teachers can communicate with parents and students. This is one of the most problematic aspects of the contract because it assumes that teachers need to be micro-managed and doesn’t recognize that educators are well-using this time.

PEC representative Ryan Normandin, a classroom teacher at Newton South, began by saying that the past few years have been very hard. Again, to paraphrase: The pandemic exacerbated our students’ social and emotional needs. Guidance counselors have huge caseloads and can’t get kids into hospitals when they needed to. Such problems ripple throughout the building.

Turning to the Cost-Of-Living-Adjustment, he said that Inflation was 20% over 10 years, and teachers received a 10% increase. The state-appointed mediator proposed a 3%-3%-3% COLA increase, and after 18 months of negotiation, the teachers received an offer of 2.25%. Our new superintendent said that the budget has to increase by 5% each year to fund programs adequately. The impact of chronic underfunding has resulted in extremely large honors classes; his Junior Honors math has 32 students in each section, and he can’t give them individualized attention. Newton has lost programs and no longer gets first-choice teachers. The teacher’s morale is shot. This isn’t a crisis that’s down the road; the crisis is here, now. Yet the Mayor Fuller continues to overestimate expenditures and underestimate revenues. She has a huge surplus yet only agreed to a 3.5% increase in the budget for the schools — not enough to maintain, much less regain, our educational excellence. Michael Burtch, classroom teacher at Bigelow Middle School and member of the Negotiations Team said that while he believes the messaging is that the Newton teachers are adequately i.e., competitively paid, the reality is that the School Committee believes that the teachers are being overpaid and want to correct that.

Two final points were made:

1. Financial insecurity is huge today among educators, and this has contributed to the drop in teacher morale.
It makes teachers feel devalued that the system doesn’t trust them as educators.

2. A “No Confidence” vote is significant — not just “part of the process.”

With one minute left before the meeting ended at 8:30, Councilor Greenberg told us that the Community Garden will seek additional money from the Community Development Corporation to supplement funds already in hand. If all goes well, the garden should be ready for planting in 2025.

The meeting ended exactly at 8:30 PM

Our next NCNA meeting will be on February 8. Hope to see you there.

Warm regards,

Robin Z Boger, President

Newton Corner Neighborhood Association