Public hearing Tuesday (tomorrow) on alderman mid-term replacement process

[fefie.livejournal.com]

The Board of Aldermen will hold a public hearing tomorrow night about what should happen when a BOA member resigns with less than a year left of their 2-year terms, as happened twice this year with Bill Roche (ward 1) and Sean O'Donovan (ward 5).

(http://www.somervillema.gov/calendar/hearing-boa-appointments)

Somerville Patch has a thorough article about the history behind tomorrow's public hearing and the proposals being put forward so far.

(http://somerville.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/public-to-speak-out-about-on-how-aldermen-fill-vacancies)

The BOA want to hear residents' ideas too. Many voters expressed their unhappiness with the resignations by voting against the people who were put into the resigning aldermen's seats, but now the question is: How should this issue be treated, going forward?

The School committee approached their vacancy (when ward 1 SC member Maureen Bastardi was nominated by Bill Roche to fill his seat) by holding a public application and interview process to find a replacement. This process could be influenced by the resigning alderman behind the scenes, though. The proposal discussed in Patch to let the defeated candidate in the previous election take the seat if they had more than 40% of the vote is intended to persuade BOA members not to resign unless they have a really good reason to do so.

If you can't make it to the hearing, please email your alderman and the aldermen-at-large (contact info here: http://www.somervillema.gov/departments/board-of-aldermen)

Comments

[ron_newman]

- let the defeated candidate in the previous election take the seat if they had more than 40% of the vote

I think something like this is done in Boston and Cambridge, at least for at-large council seats.

[boblothrope.livejournal.com]

It makes a lot more sense in a proportional representation election like Cambridge's, and not so much sense for a winner-take-all districted seat.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

In our setup in Somerville, it's a terrible idea. The loser lost for a reason. I doubt there'd be a majority of people happy if President Obama needed to resign, and Mitt Romney became the president. The only reasonable approach, IMHO, is a special election.

[ron_newman]

Also, I wonder whether this decision really should go to the new Board of Aldermen next January, rather than the current lame-duck board. Five of the eleven aldermen will be new next year.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

That sounds like a plus, to me. If five of the current aldermen won't be around next year, then they have nothing to lose and can be objective about the issue. I wouldn't expect 11 aldermen just starting a term to vote to make it more painful for themselves to leave, even if it is best for the city.

[ron_newman]

Point taken. Two of the current 11 (Courtney O"Keefe and Maureen Bastardi) were appointed under the current system, then lost their re-election campaigns.

[courtney o'keefe (from livejournal.com)]

Hi Ron,

Just to clarify, Maureen and my appointments were very different. Maureen was recommended by her successor and approved the same night. I was recommended by my successor, formally nominated by a current member of the Board of Aldermen the same night (Alderman at Large Bruce Desmond, Legislative Number 194650), sat through a public job interview with the Confirmation of Appointments Committee before being approved by the full Board of Aldermen on April 25th. Clumping Maureen and I together is something the press has incorrectly done since April and I just want to set the record straight.

Thanks,
Courtney

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

Buh-bye!

[courtney o'keefe (from livejournal.com)]

Is this directed at me?

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is. And I will now give you the courtesy of a response, which is more than I (or several other folks I've spoken with) have gotten from you, when you were asked serious questions.

Here is the problem: You became alderman under a process which many people find quite distasteful. It was your responsibility to convince these people that you deserved that job in the first place, and secondly, to keep it. By being completely unresponsive and/or evasive when you were asked questions, you failed to do that in many people's minds, and as a consequence of that, you were the only incumbent who was voted out of their position. Furthermore, as Joel points out, whining that everyone's being mean to you because they have expressed their discomfort with the process by which you got the job doesn't make you look very good. Two weeks or one day does not matter. You were given a job you seem to feel you are entitled to, and won't acknowledge that your soon-to-be-former constituents (who, BTW, include tenants who have rights, not just landlords who unnecessarily freak out about something as innocent as couchsurfing) are not very happy when you act entitled, and last Tuesday they made their discomfort clear.

Oh, and two more points, in response to your other post:

> "If having ‘Buh-Bye’ written under a comment I made is one of those consequences, I’m fine with that."

Nice going! Those grapes certainly must be sour.

> " Sure beats the ‘dwarf lesbian’ comment back in April."

If, by that snotty little aside, you are trying to imply that the people who voted against you did it because they're homophobic, well, I, at least, take serious exception to that accusation. Frankly, I believe that the BOA needs more diversity, and had you been a decent candidate, would have been very happy to see you elected. Unfortunately, by your own behaviour during your short tenure and also the campaign, you've demonstrated that it's not necessary to be an old, white, heterosexual man to be part of the Good Old Boy network of Curtatone cronies (such as Stan Koty) that Somerville desperately needs to get away from.

Your whole campaign seemed to be about being a "lifelong resident" of Somerville, as if that somehow makes you better than those of us who have come from elsewhere and made this our home, too. Frankly, given the stellar example of Dorothy Kelly Gay (who came here as a young woman from Ireland) as opposed to, say, the various natives who've ended up indicted for corruption or extortion and/or ended up in prison (Bretta, Piro, Campo, Howe, the McKennas, Creedon, shall I continue?), and the rather, ahem, dubious ethics of the current mayor, I know who I'd choose.

Next time, if you do plan to run for public office again, work to get the trust of *all* of your constituents, answer questions, give concrete solutions to problems instead of vague platitudes and assurances to those who were born here that you're "one of them" and you might up getting and keeping the job you said you wanted (though from your response to Joel, I'm not convinced that you do.)

That's all I have to say. If you care to rebut any of these points, feel free. Given your past behaviour, I'm not convinced you're willing to put in the effort. Hence, your loss last Tuesday.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

As I suspected, no response. How predictable. And you wonder why voters are put off by your arrogance. What a waste of time.

[courtney o'keefe (from livejournal.com)]

pywaket,

NEVER have I ever been evasive or indirect when answering questions. I have always answered anything that I was asked with honesty. If I don't know an answer, I get an answer for them. This is something you would see if you had a conversation with me face to face.

The process that put me in office, which IS everything you described it to be above, is allowable by the City Charter. I have supported, both, a rules change for the Board of Aldermen and a Charter change which requires a Home Rule Petition to be sent to the State. I went through a public job interview with the Confirmation of Appointments Committee and was eventually approved by the full Board of Aldermen, including, ones that are critical of the process. Do I think this is the best process? No. Would I like to see it changed? Yes. Am I supporting this change? Yes. This could have been cleared up by having a conversation with me face to face.

Legislation that I have submitted comes directly from my constituents. The Couchsurfing issue was brought up by a landlord and, after I submitted it, verified by tenants themselves. Despite newspaper articles, I am not looking to ban it. I am looking to educate landlords about the practice. From there, they can make their own decision. This could have also been cleared up by having a conversation with me face to face.

Other legislation that I have submitted includes increased communication efforts to residents, keeping Ward Alderman updated on construction projects in their districts, and honoring Veterans for their service to our country among others. You can see all of my legislation on my website as I am the only Alderman to have this available online. I can also tell you about my legislation face to face.

I am proud of being a lifelong resident of Somerville and put it in my campaign literature because it was one of the first questions I was asked when I was out doorknocking. If it was on the minds of so many Ward 5 residents, I included it. Everything else that was included in my literature was true and open for discussion. I'm not sure who you talked to, but I had some great conversations with people about everything from the appointment process to increasing the amount of beer and wine licenses in Somerville for local restaurants. I have not been shy about my dismay with the whole "old school, new school" argument and stated this publicly at one of my fundraisers. We are all from the same school and I'm just as much an Alderman to a lifer as I am to someone who moved in 2 weeks ago. This could have also been realized after having a conversation with me face to face.

I lost by under 200 votes and raised $1,000 less than a gentleman who was on the School Committee for 8 years. Mark and I have a nice relationship and he has been quoted as saying that I did a great job as Alderman. Something I greatly appreciate.

I have made the effort to respond to you in your comfort zone of an online forum, but will not be doing so from this point forward as I prefer to speak about concerns face to face.

[joelbikesalot.livejournal.com]

Hi Courtney,

I don't believe that you are setting the record straight at all. You were not elected by the voters of Ward 5. Whether it took 1 day or 2 weeks the result was the same. There were many Alderman and citizens who felt very uncomfortable with the process that made both Maureen and you Alderman.

You are not guilty of the process that placed you in power, but you made the decision ( I'm sure many others would have made the same decision). You have to live with the consequences.

Thanks,

Joel

[courtney o'keefe (from livejournal.com)]

If having ‘Buh-Bye’ written under a comment I made is one of those consequences, I’m fine with that. Sure beats the ‘dwarf lesbian’ comment back in April.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

Care to point us at that supposed comment? I've searched DSLJ and can find no such thing. If you're implying someone here made it, either provide proof, or you owe folks here an apology.

[ron_newman]

It wasn't here on LJ. We did have this post about it in May, but the comments quickly drifted to other topics.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

So not only is soon-to-be-former alderperson Okeefe thin-skinned and entitled, she is also dishonest. By which I mean, she's insinuating by omission that the alleged comment was posted here. Charming. Looks like Ward 5 dodged a bullet last Tuesday...

[cos]

For my part, it didn't even occur to me to think she meant that comment was necessarily on LJ, when I read her initial comment. When you replied saying you'd searched DSLJ for it, I was surprised that you thought she meant it must be here. I assumed it was probably elsewhere all along.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

That's why I said "if". You are welcome to your own interpretations, but it certainly seemed to me like she was insinuating that it occurred here.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

I've been assuming that there is something between you and Courtney that we're not seeing. Is that not the case? Your posts seem disproportionately and awkwardly vitriolic for the factual claims you have made.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

Absolutely not. As far as I know, I've never met her or interacted with her anywhere other than public online fora. I just find her behaviour as an Alderperson utterly appalling and disgusting, and when she comes here and spews misinformation, it just makes me, as someone who cares very much about Somerville and wants to see it thrive, extremely upset. Furthermore, I find her insinuations that anyone who disagrees with her or voted against her is a bigot to be repulsive.

I'm very grateful to the voters of Ward 5 for making sure that we won't all have to suffer the consequences of her being on the BOA. And if her attitude doesn't change, I think it's unlikely we'll have to in the future, either.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

What was the misinformation?

Let me see if I can break down what you dislike:

1. Courtney was appointed instead of elected. (True).
2. Courtney brought the concerns of a landlord regarding couchsurfing to the board of aldermen. (True).
3. Courtney is part of the "Good Old Boy network of Curtatone cronies." (Unsubstantiated)
4. One of Courtney's campaign points was that she is a lifelong resident of Somerville. (True).
5. She insinuated that someone made a "dwarf lesbian" comment here (Unsubstantiated)
6. She insinuated that anyone who voted against her was a homophobic bigot (Unsubstantiated)

Did I miss anything?

From where I'm sitting:

1. This would be true of anyone holding that seat right now.
2. This could easily be attributed to political inexperience rather than a nefarious plot to join a secret landlord cartel and screw tenants. It also sounds like she might have confused couchsurfing with something like AirBNB - which IS a serious concern for all residents.
3. I'm not sure why you say this. Also, it seems to me that ward 5 likes Curatone or else he probably would have had an opponent, so I doubt this is why she (narrowly) lost.
4. Is there any lifelong resident alderman, state rep, etc that has NOT campaigned on this?
5. Like cos, I don't see this at all.
6. I don't see this. I agree she shouldn't have brought it up here. I took the point as "I've had worse so this doesn't bother me."

[ron_newman]

I don't see why AirBNB should be "a serious concern for all residents" .. but admittedly this invites another off-topic digression.

[keithn.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm sure it is a discussion we'll have eventually. The issue is with the extreme case where people rent apartments or buy condos for the purpose of turning them into a full time airbnb unlicensed hotel, which has happened. I have no problem with people who let travelers crash on their couch for free or a couple bucks while the resident is there themselves, which is what I think of when I think of couchsurfing, which is about meeting people and not about making money.

[surrealestate.livejournal.com]

IME, many condo association rules explicitly prohibit leasing the unit for anything less than 30 days. Most leases don't allow sub-leasing.

But why does that make it a "concern for all residents"?

[keithn.livejournal.com]

I say "all residents" as opposed to "landlords" because it's a concern for both renters and owner-occupiers as well since most people don't want to live next door to (or above or below) a hotel. I don't necessarily think every single resident will care, but that residents from all classes (renters, owners, owner-occupiers) will care and it is not just a landlord vs. tenant issue.

Example of what most people probably don't want to live next to: http://needwant.com/p/buying-apartment-airbnb/

Besides the noise and random people, this kind of thing has the potential to drive rents and real estate prices up, as you can make more money renting your house out for short stints on airbnb than by leasing it to a permanent resident. Even if people don't turn units into permanent airbnb hotels, residents may be willing to pay more for an apartment knowing they can rent out a spare room or couch on airbnb, which still drives rent up.

You'd like to think this kind of thing is covered by lease agreements, HOAs, zoning laws, and these are enforced, but obviously you can see that it isn't just by looking at listings on the airbnb site. If we want to allow airbnb in some cases, we need to decide on where to draw the line and how to do so.

The case Courtney brought to the board of alderman was silly because it was couchsurfing (or so I am led to believe) which is no different from letting a friend crash on your couch for free while you are home. The owner was also complaining about things like pictures of the inside of the house being posted online, which the tenant obviously has the right to do.

[cos]

One idea that I think is worth considering is, if a vacancy opens up with less than a year left until the next election, the person appointed to fill that vacancy be ineligible to run for board of aldermen in that upcoming election.

[ron_newman]

That is one of the proposals (specifically, proposal G)

[surrealestate.livejournal.com]

Can anyone report on how the meeting went? I forgot about it until just now.

[ron_newman]

Here's a report from Wicked Local Somerville (Somerville Journal).

And here's another, from Somerville Patch.