Newsletter Vol. 2, Week 21: Updates on Guns, Zoning, Christina St bridge, MBTA

Sign up to receive Ward and political newsletters by email here.

Before everyone heads off for Memorial Day Weekend, I have a few short updates from the City Council, the Mayor, and from Ward 5 on the following topics: upcoming events, vaccination opportunities, gun store regulations, zoning redesign focus groups, the Christina St bridge study, and MBTA D Line track work.

Door-knocking report: Now that I’m fully vaccinated, I stopped by about 40 homes today in the Newton Highlands part of Ward 5 south of Route 9 – to check in again with people I spoke to in 2019 to see how they are doing through all of this pandemic situation and to ask if I can help out with anything. I’ve already sent off several emails to city departments requesting assistance with various resident inquiries. If you have questions for your area, don’t hesitate to let me know.

As a reminder, the City’s annual Pride Flag-raising event next is Tuesday: Per the Mayor’s newsletter, “Celebrate LGBTQ+ Pride Month at our Pride Flag Raising Ceremony on Tuesday, June 1 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall. We will be honoring LGBTQ+ healthcare workers from Newton-Wellesley Hospital and the cofounders of Sunbow Zine...” Anyone is welcome to attend.

Vaccination update from the Mayor’s newsletter:

Still not vaccinated? Newton Health and Human Services is holding a free walk-in COVID-19 vaccine clinic with the one-dose Johnson and Johnson vaccine.

When: Wednesday, June 2

Time: 10:00 a.m. - Noon

Where: Newton City Hall (1000 Commonwealth Ave), check in at Room 107A

No appointment necessary, anyone 18 and older is welcome 

If you are having difficulties getting to a vaccine appointment, please call the Newton Health and Human Services Department for assistance.

Gun store update

The City Council has scheduled a special meeting for the evening of Wednesday June 2 to attempt again to pass a strict zoning regulation and special permit process for firearms businesses in Newton, after one Councilor blocked it procedurally at the last meeting, without letting us work on final amendments. The existing planned store is on the verge of opening if the zone change is not passed before it does. They have turned in their building permit application at this point and it is now in the processing queue.

The reason for the delay at the last meeting was to try to force consideration of a total, blanket ban on the firearms industry. Our Law Department has repeatedly advised us that – unlike a total ban – it would be more legally defensible in the courts to simply pass a zoning code that allows such a gun store in theory but in buffered locations that are either inconvenient to the industry or unlikely to find favorable free market reactions from commercial landlords, as well as to adopt a special permit process that includes the same community public health requirements as other special permit applicants in other industries must meet. If the applicant cannot muster the support of two-thirds of the City Council, then it will be rejected, but not for any special reason specific to the industry. All of these things would mean that a gun store is extremely unlikely in the marketplace and politically, but definitely still permissible in theory, which should be constitutionally compliant. It would still be one of the strictest regulatory environments in the nation.

Some Councilors and some residents have said we should “take a stand” against the gun lobby and try to fight for a total ban, even if it risks a legal challenge bankrolled by that same lobby, with an uncertain fate before the US courts. They tell us that there are no precedents so far suggesting that a total ban is unconstitutional, and so we should have no fear of negative rulings under the law.

In my generation, including among many young progressive lawyers, there is a popular slogan about the courts, which is roughly as follows: "the law is fake because everything is political." The idea that there is some kind of abstract, undeniable Truth in the law or even in past precedents is naïveté of the highest order. The only thing that matters in this discussion is our evaluation as rational adults who have paid attention to the past three decades of trends in the US courts and especially the US Supreme Court is what is likely to happen, not as a matter of law, but as a matter of possible choices by the nine political actors of the US Supreme Court, who now skew heavily in one direction on gun issues. It is a wholly irrelevant fiction to point to a lack of precedents. 

This court could strike down all abortion rights or environmental protections this term if they want to. They could strike down all gun control if they want to. There is no reason to expect anything better. And there is no higher truth of law preventing them from doing so. They can do anything they want, without limit. For that reason, we need to make a rational hedge here and take defensive actions that not only protect Newton's rights to regulate firearms, but also protect the entire rest of the nation from a negative ruling that we brought on.

The strict regulation approach with zoning rules and a fair special permit process with a 2/3rds supermajority affirmative approval requirement is more than sufficient to achieve our community's objectives on gun stores. 

So, let us be honest about what the proposed total ban is really about for certain City Councilors promoting it. Sadly, it is about good old fashioned “playing politics,” trying to make some of us on the City Council look weaker on this issue because we support strict regulations with very high barriers, instead of supporting a total ban, even when the outcome is likely to be the same (no gun store). They've seized on a gun control wedge to try to persuade voters that we aren't all in agreement on gun control in Newton because they believe it will help them unseat some of us in the November elections and restore their control of the City Council.

In doing so, they don't care what the consequences of this short-term thinking might be, up to and including a US Supreme Court ruling striking down local firearms industry regulation of any kind nationwide. All 24 of us Councilors and the Mayor's Administration are working to protect Newton from the firearms industry. It’s simply untrue to suggest that some subset of us are not as serious or committed to it, just because we believe a total ban is a dangerous strategy for achieving our goals.

Zoning Redesign: Understanding Focus Groups

Some residents (and Councilors) have recently been asking for clarification on the “equitable focus groups” for community feedback on possible changes to zoning in Newton’s Village Centers, and I thought I should take a moment to help explain that for anyone who is confused.

These focus groups are in addition to (not instead of) more general feedback opportunities and they are targeted more narrowly at the following groups of people (who can sign up here):

  • Black, Indigenous, and People of Color

  • younger person (15-35)

  • renters

  • people with disabilities

  • LGBTQ+

  • Members of the creative community

  • older adults (65+)

There are two basic reasons for conducting these narrower focus group sessions. First, they are intended to round out the demographics of those attending the general meetings to ensure that we have something closer to a representative sampling of Newtonians. Older white, straight homeowners are well-represented in general community meetings already, but some other categories are not as well-represented compared to the real demographics of the city.

Second, some of these constituencies have distinctive interests in the zoning of village centers. One obvious example would be how the built environment affects people with varying types or categories of disabilities.

One example you might not be aware of – depending on your own background or where else you have lived – would be how commercial zoning and land use policy has affected the LGBTQ community in recent years in the Boston area. Many gay bars in previously lower-rent commercial districts have been closed over the past decade due to unsustainable market pressures and lack of programs to help protect them, even after decades of operation. Many predominantly gay residential neighborhoods in numerous American cities have also disappeared over recent decades, due to market pressures and lack of protections.

Another similar example would be the huge pressure in rent costs on artistic districts, places that had art studios for many years in large concentrations. You’ll notice “members of the creative community” was a focus group category, too.

So, it’s important to understand that the Planning Department is organizing these specialized focus groups because there are some aspects of our community zoning and land use policies that affect certain sub-communities within our community differently from how they affect everyone else, and we want to hear from them on those specific points, which might be outside the time constraints of a general meeting.

Christina St bridge study update

On May 26, I attended the virtual Christina St Pedestrian/Multi-Use Bridge Feasibility Study Community Engagement Meeting, hosted by the Planning Department. If you were unable to attend (or wish to submit community feedback), you can check out the presentation and find the contact information for this project on this city webpage.

This bridge, currently inaccessible from the Newton side of the Charles River, has been an important pedestrian access route to nearby DCR lands and various businesses for many nearby residents, especially those maintaining religious practices in the vicinity.

The feasibility study scope will be to assess 3 scenarios (and develop concept plans for each):

1) Rehab the bridge

2) Build a new bridge on the same site

3) Build a different bridge nearby instead

Here’s what has happened so far: Record plans were collected, a field survey was conducted, and the bridge has been inspected including below the water. An online survey to the public got hundreds of responses.

Some piles on the upstream side of the bridge are completely broken and detached above the waterline from the sections driven into the riverbed. Some of the other piles are also deteriorating. The current bridge (which is closed off on the Christina St end) is not believed to be in imminent danger of collapse, despite the broken piles. There are various things they could do to repair the piles as part of a bridge rehab, without even needing to drive new piles.

By contrast with the broken piles, the upper superstructure of the bridge is in relatively fair condition and could be rehabilitated for preservation.

The scenarios for a bridge rehab (10 ft or 14 ft wide) would include demolishing the existing "safety walk" and safety railing to instead put in a new, wider deck on the superstructure. The new deck could be timber or paved.

The scenarios for a new bridge (either on site or nearby) would cross the entire river in a single span with no piers/piles. There is a similar example on the Watertown riverwalk. It would probably have a 14 ft wide deck, concrete or timber.

A new bridge "nearby" would probably be right next to the existing bridge, on the downstream (west) side, to keep options open to connect to further future bike paths on properties owned by Northland on the Christina St side of Needham St.

There was a question from the audience about other, more stationary recreational bridge uses like fishing and nature-watching or photography. The consultants advised that a wider deck would fit these easily next to cyclists or pedestrians, while a narrower deck might not.

The Price Center will have final sign-off on any plan due to the need for an access easement across the end of their parking lot. So, there might be some unusual safety measures as part of this project because their clients have special safety needs.

MBTA track work acceleration in June

The following info comes from the MBTA’s Green Line Transformation project team:

Starting after the end of regular service on Friday, June 11, crews will work around the clock—weekdays, weeknights and weekends— for a total of 18 days to accelerate the construction and ultimately reduce the duration of impacts to our riders and neighbors. The work will take place for 24 hours a day as follows:

  • From the end of regular train service on Friday, June 11 to the beginning of regular train service on Monday, June 21

  • From the end of regular train service on Wednesday, June 23 to the beginning of regular train service on Saturday, July 3

During the accelerated work, the noisiest track replacement is anticipated to be concentrated in the Reservoir area and the Riverside area. However, crews will be working all along the project corridor (between Riverside and Beaconsfield) on catenary pole installations, welding of previously installed new rail, and signal replacement, some of which can generate noise. In addition, crews will be moving equipment on and off the tracks in various locations. Please check the Work Locations section on the project website for the latest anticipated work locations.

Work to take place includes:

  • Replacement of 9 units of special trackwork (switches and turnouts) where trains switch tracks

  • Replacement of track, including timber ties and rail

  • Installation of state-of-the-art signal equipment

The MBTA Maintenance Department’s contractor will also take this opportunity to complete vegetation maintenance work on the D Branch.