The role of advisory committees in sustaining East Boston's awesomeness

Excel Academy is looking to build a high school a few blocks from my house in East Boston.  I heard a few days ago that the political leadership get to appoint the impact advisory committee members.  Two have already been named.  One has already begun to solicit early comments.  However, I'm worried about how it would operate and am frankly wondering what the value of any comments would have.

My concern is rooted in the fact that one of the other people who has already been appointed to the committee is someone who has publicly stated that immigrants, which comprise a significant part of the student population at Excel Academy, are not worthy public support. 

I know this because this individual signed (#615) a petition in 2009 expressing opposition to Governor Deval Patrick's New Americans Agenda. The petition specifically objected to:

• expanding programs to support English as a second language learning in public schools,
• increasing funding for translation and interpreter service in public schools,
• providing access to in-state college tuition for all immigrant residents in public universities, and 
• other services and programs that support the successful integration of our immigrant neighbors. 

The student body at Excel Academy in East Boston is 72% Latino and represents 23 different nationalities. And yet, this individual is publicly opposed to the very conditions that support the academic success of many of those students.

Why would anyone who wants to meaningfully contribute to the conversation and planning of this school make the time to participate when someone who has already been appointed to the committee itself believes that parents who are still learning to speak English should be denied translation when talking with teachers and school officials? Think about the message that sends to the rest of us who care about exactly the kinds of families that Excel Academy aims to serve.
 

The problem is not necessarily this individual.  She has every right to hold whatever opinion she wants and to express her political viewpoint in any legal manner available to her.  However, it strikes me as inappropriate that an individual whose public statements are in opposition to how a publicly funded charter school operates is appointed to advise on the siting of such school.

The problem, as I see it, is that it seems that our elected officials, who are responsible for appointing people to these advisory committees, seem to only know a handful of people who live in the neighborhood.

All eight advisory committee members for this committee will be appointed by four elected officials.  How many of those people will be Latinos (who comprise 54% of the neighborhood's population) or immigrants (50% of our neighbors are immigrants)?  How many of them will be parents of students who currently attend public schools?  How many of them will be educators who currently teach?  How many of them will be one of the growing number of urban planners and architects who live in our neighborhood?  How many of them will be people who physically live in the area where the new school will be sited?

Every time the same people keep getting appointed to these committees, we lose the opportunity to capitalize on the diversity of people and talent who live here.  We have immigrant neighbors who were professors of environmental sustainability in their native homelands.  We have young planners who know how to read transportation studies.  We have contractors who specialize in environmentally sustainable and healthy buildings who live in this neighborhood. We have bilingual parents who could more effectively bring those supposedly hard to reach parents to public meetings than either of the two appointed committee members.

If the city and BRA were really interested in a meaningful advisory process (and maybe they aren't), they could more effectively tap the organic talent that already exists in this neighborhood by actually opening up the process of applying to participate.

Instead of going to their friends and political contributors, how about asking for a list of people from all of the neighborhood groups.  And how about actually talking with those individuals to determine whether they have whatever skills are useful, but more importantly, the attitudes to work in a public process to support a public school that serves a population and neighborhood that deserves exactly the kind of support that the petition above opposes?

Think about what it would mean to East Boston's future if we could engage all of our residents, both long time residents and newcomers (domestic and foreign), in the decision-making processes in our neighborhood.  I think it would be awesome.

Dear Marty Walsh - I would like to vote for you

Dear Marty Walsh,

I admit that I did not expect you to be one of the top candidates in the preliminary.  This says more about me than about you.  I was clearly not paying as much attention as I thought.

You should know that, in the past, I have worked with John Connolly.  He provided urban sustainability projects that my urban studies students could work on.  He even came and spoke with my students about development issues.  I also found his office helpful in assisting some parent start to address longstanding issues at the local high school.  Going into the preliminary, I thought, regardless of who I supported on September 24, I would end up voting for him on November 5.

But shortly after the preliminary, I became increasingly skeptical about the friends Connolly keeps.  While he criticized you for the support you received from organized labor, he was receiving money from those who support a number of causes that I oppose and, in one case find offensive (e.g. Pioneer Institute, American Crossroads).

As I tried to make an informed decision about which candidate to support, I began to lean in your direction.  I was able to meet with you when you made time to speak to some of the Latinas of East Boston.  I was impressed when you appeared to be visibly upset by the stories told by one of our youth of high school counselors actively discouraging Latino students from pursuing a college education.  I was also impressed by the level of detailed knowledge around development issues, and the BRA in particular, that you showed. And people who I have a lot of respect for made compelling arguments in your favor.

However, I go into this election as an East Boston resident, more so than in any other election.  We are faced with potentially the most important change this neighborhood has seen since the airport dispossessed us of Wood Island Park in the 1960s.  I've never been a single issue voter, but this time, there is one issue that can make or break the quality of life in the neighborhood I have come to call home.

Just as decades of expansion of Logan Airport continues to negatively impact the quality of life in this neighborhood, the proposed casino at Suffolk Downs will no doubt have large repercussions for me and my neighbors.

You voted in favor of the casino bill when you were in the statehouse.  And you have publicly stated your support for a casino at Suffolk Downs. After much thought and research, I do not believe a casino in this (or any) dense, urban neighborhood is a good idea.

Some of my neighbors believe that the only thing that could save Suffolk Downs-the racetrack, after the failure of more than two decades of public subsidies and at least one bailout, is a casino.  You give every indication that you believe this as well.

But more importantly, if the residents of East Boston vote against the casino mitigation agreement, you have not publicly stated whether you would reopen host community agreement negotiations with Suffolk Downs if presented the opportunity.

Without that assurance, I cannot bring myself to vote for you. Given the available evidence, I've come to believe that a vote for you is a vote for a casino.  Without a public statement to the contrary, I will unfortunately not be able to support you at this time.