(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville News belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville News, its staff or publishers.)
Charles Chisholm is a candidate for Ward 6 alderman this year, and he sat with us at our last contributors meeting, where some of us have known him almost our entire lives and to others he was a new face in a real race. He is no stranger to local politics. His professional and political careers started around the same time in the mid to late 1960s, and there seems no slowing down for him 40 years later.
A life-long resident of the city, Chisholm grew up in East Somerville where he lived until 1982, when he moved to College Avenue and still lives today. That was the year he started working at Bunker Hill Community College (BHCC) as a math professor. When he retired from there in 2003, he was the head of the math department for the college.
“I started teaching in 1967 at the Northeastern Junior High School, and I truly enjoyed the last 40 years in the profession,” he said.
He may be retired, but still teaches a course here and there at BHCC – something he said he will probably keep doing for years.
Chisholm got his taste in the local political scene when he was only 18 years old, supporting a candidate who ended up losing.
“My introduction to Somerville politics was like being punched in the face,” he said.
That didn’t stop him for becoming a candidate – he ran unsuccessfully for state representative in 1968 and for Ward 1 School Committee in 1969, again unsuccessfully. In his second attempt at School Committee in 1971, he fared better, winning on a platform to remove the then superintendent of schools.
He went on to run unsuccessfully for mayor in 1973, and then he unseated then Ward 1 Alderman Jim McCarthy in 1975 and sat on the board for one term before losing the seat to Tim Creedon in 1977. He spent most of the rest of this time splitting his time between teaching and being a political consultant behind the scenes for many candidates not just in Somerville but all over Massachusetts. His last three attempts at public office were in 1989, 1991 and 1993 against then Ward 6 Alderman Jack Connolly, which, while unsuccessful, produced some of the most memorable political literature in local political history.
“I know the issues. I have the time to devote to this important role in the community, and I have the experience to work with the right people to be effective,” he said.
He went on to explain that his priorities, if elected, would be to push Green Technology, paying more attention to public safety issues and creating a stronger relationship with Tufts University.
“I’m running because I think this ward could use a full-time alderman I have the time to devote to the important issues of not just the ward, but the city as a whole while on the board,” he said.
Chisholm expects to campaign as hard as he ever has for the Ward 6 alderman seat this year and plans on working hard to make his campaign all about the issues.
One thing is for sure, issues or not, the highlight of this next local political cycle will be waiting to see what new political literature Charles produces every week.
"His last three attempts at public office were in 1989, 1991 and 1993 against then Ward 6 Alderman Jack Connolly, which, while unsuccessful, produced some of the most memorable political literature in local political history."
Can you post some of these brochures? It would be great for all of us who are somewhat new to Somerville to see these.
Posted by: Ward5Resident | July 12, 2007 at 07:56 PM
Oh I remember Charles well. Shall I spill the beans or wait until some of Charlie's most memorable superb literary efforts surface from the archives? Let me give Marie Howe a call and see if she can reall some of dear old Charles' most memorable quotes.
I'll get back to you on that.
Dr. Mrs. McCarthy
Posted by: Dr. Mrs. McCarthy | July 12, 2007 at 09:44 PM
Is it me or does Garlie Chisolm look a lot like "Count Chocula" the morning cereal vampire ? I also remember Charlie running for assessor to unseat Bobby "Mr FIXIT" Campo who at the time was one of the "Ship of FOOLS" that charlie wanted out of office......you gotts to love charlie He is right up there with Mary Soglirio and S Lester ralph as one of somerville's finest candidates for any office that might be open at the time has the urge to run again.......
Posted by: Butchie | July 13, 2007 at 06:48 AM
I know Charles Chisholm very well. He is a doer...and not a talker. And unlike the current Ward Six Alderman, Princess Rebecca, he will return phone calls and get things done for Ward Six. The only accomplishment Princess Rebecca can point to, during her term of office, is a screaming match with the President of the Board of Aldermen. She hasn't helped Ward Six...she has hurt it. As a result, Ward Six's representation on the Board of Alderman has been degraded and marginilized by her shrill and childish antics. Electing this "Princess Rebecca" character was a big mistake...and a lot of people know it. It is definitely time for a new alderman in Ward Six; someone who can deal with the Board of Aldermen, the Mayor, and citizens of Ward Six in a professional manner. I urge everyone in Ward Six to vote for him.
Posted by: No Friend of Princess Rebecca | July 13, 2007 at 08:11 PM
GGGGASP! Could she be a hysterical woman? But just to use a bit of your same dumb stereotype medicine: Just look at the guy. Remember "Night of the Living Dead?" He's creepily smiling because he's thinking of slurping your brain out of your skull.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 14, 2007 at 01:55 PM
Talk about dumb stereotypes: calling a senior citizen
a member of the "living dead" shows great disrespect for someone who's spent a lifelong career teaching students. The way this professor writes may just come back to "haunt" some of these GGGGasping progressives and their candidate(s).
Posted by: The Patriot | July 14, 2007 at 04:26 PM
Just a follow up to "Somerville Resident's" comments. Princess Rebecca is not a "hysterical woman", but her actions on the Somerville Board of Aldermen have been appalling and, accordingly, have hurt the residents of Ward Six. If Princess Rebecca were a man, even the most objective person on the planet would deem her behavor not only inappropriate, but unprofessional as well. And let me also say that women have been serving in public office for a long time with great success and, through hard work, have outperformed their male counterparts in many areas. Next year, we could see the first woman elected President of the United States. In 2005, Princess Rebecca was a fresh face and she campaigned very hard. She fooled a lot of people into believing that she would be a hard working alderman too. Today, she is getting paid $30,000 a year to be a part time alderman; not return phone calls; ignore her constituents; and scream and attack everyone on the Board of Aldermen who does not agree with her warped views. It comes as no surprise that she can't get anything accomplished on the Board of Aldermen. Mr. Chisholm, on the other hand, worked very hard as an alderman and school committee man. He delivered a lot for his constituents and the City of Somerville. Today, he wants to be a full time alderman again. The residents of Ward Six have never really liked royalty and are tired of this "Princess Rebecca" character. They want a full time alderman to take charge and get things accomplished with professionalism and civility. Charles Chisholm is the man to do it. It's time for a change.
Posted by: No Friend of Princess Rebecca | July 14, 2007 at 05:17 PM
Well, regardless of what you say, if more people dislike her than like her then she'll have to go, pretty simple. Charles Chisholm would have to convince me he's not gonna slurp my brain, though.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 14, 2007 at 06:36 PM
Gee whiz Somerville Resident, as an "AA woman" I'd imagine that you would be one of the last people to criticize someone because of their appearance.
Hypocrite.
Posted by: Go Figure | July 14, 2007 at 07:43 PM
I met Princess Rebbekka a few years ago before she won alderman. She was smug, self absorbed and talk down to anyone she didn't agree with. I am a fan of proggress, just not the people who claim to be proggressives. They are self rightious brats who have never really had to live like the rest of us. They don't seem to have to work and worry about bills, so they have all of this free time to complain and support usless "trendy" political causes. Somerville, like the rest of Boston has changed so much over the years. Stand up people that could have taken this city to the next level have been eithered pushed out or silenced by the the smug libs. Sad reality is this, do you think half of them will even be living in Somerville, let alone Mass in ten years. Come on, on the surface its about the feel good issues, in reality its about pushing their career to the next level.
Maybe she is different, I could be wrong. Here is my issue with her, she is barely thirty and hasn't lived enough to really understand the important issues. She like the rest of the ex-college kids who move here for a few years don't have kids in the schools, don't own property, many have never even had to struggle to get by. How can we put our support around immature people who lack the experience in life to confront the issues that concern the bulk of us who will be here in ten years when Somerville is no longer funky to live in.
I remember a few years back when Jehlen was running for office. Some kid barely twenty came to my door canvassing and started talk about how much she cared about the city. I asked her where she was from, I didn't recognize her. She was from NJ and was a college student at Tufts. I asked her how long she had been living in Somerville. She said oh, she lived in Cambridge. To be honest I was kind of angered a bit because what does a 20 year old originally from NJ and live in Cambridge care or know about this city. You see that is the problem our city and other face, politics is nolonger local. Organizitions like Democracy for America, ACORN and others have take small town local elections to the nation. They want to put people in office who support their major issues like Gay Marriage and others into office so they organize all over the place. I wouldn't be surprised if local candidates are getting contributions from across the country as a result of this. Now let me ask you this, aren't you disturbed by this. People with alot of money who don't even know or care about your city can get someone idelogically similar to them elected even if it will harm that community.
Another thing that gets me is the fact that Colleges and other organizations encourage people to make carrers in politics and policy more or less opening the door for young kids without a stake in the community to take over places where they probably won't be in ten years. Why, because at the end of the day its no about local issues, its about political power and self interest.
Posted by: Another Somerville Resident | July 14, 2007 at 07:48 PM
Figure Person, What goes around comes around, as they say. So, after sexism and racism, we are going into ageism. It's an uphill battle for the old guard. And it'll get harder and harder. Why? Obvious, Because it is the OLD guard, and getting older. Brains and bodies cease to function smoothly, energy gets low, fighting battles becomes nearly impossible. Just get used to the idea that younger people are gonna take your place and try to help them out instead of seeing them as the enemy.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 14, 2007 at 08:38 PM
SR,
You're an enema gone horribly wrong. Your parents must be proud of you when they hear your opinion of them.
Posted by: Go Figure | July 14, 2007 at 09:48 PM
Go Figure,
No really... Go Figure. These Progressives are all frauds. They want you to follow their ideals but they'd never do it themselves.
Please vote for Princess Rebbekkah, though. She's such an idiot it gives me a good laugh. Hee hee hee.
Posted by: No More Progressive Frauds | July 14, 2007 at 09:59 PM
Regressives are the way to go, obviously.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 14, 2007 at 10:12 PM
To "Another Somerville Resident,
You say: "its about political power and self interest."
That describes just about every politician who has run for office no matter what the affiliation is.
Posted by: brickbottom | July 14, 2007 at 11:21 PM
Calling oneself 'Progressive' does not automatically make all others 'Regressive.' But you probably knew that didn't you?
Posted by: What's in a Name? | July 15, 2007 at 12:02 AM
"Somerville Resident" must have taken lessons from the Republicans---divide and conquer---pitting age groups against each other is as stupid as pitting blacks against white, straights against gays, but sometimes it works. Most psychlogists are democrats, but the really smart ones are hired by the Republicans. "Somerville Resident" better find a smarter gaggle of phychos for this election, cause the ole professor might just "eat your brains out" - assuming you have one.
Posted by: The Patriot | July 15, 2007 at 02:44 AM
Heh, talk to those who mentioned age to begin with. But don't worry, nature will work its course.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 15, 2007 at 10:54 AM
As some of us well know, there are many types of "progressives" in the world today. Some are really liberals in the purest sense, which is fine with me. Others are a varying mix of liberalism, libertarianism, and conservativism. To say that one is "progressive" does not always mean that they are liberal. For example, there are many "progressives" who support the current Ward Six alderman "Princess Rebecca" who favor giving tens of billions of dollars each year to that, not so democratic, nation of Israel. Some of her most fervent supporters favor starting World War III with the Islamic world by dropping nuclear bombs on Iran and are, oddly enough, against "gay marriage" due to their religious beliefs. What a contrast. On one hand...these "progressives" believe that the United States of America should continue to dump nearly a trillion dollars down the drain in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for what, NOTHING. Yet these same "progressives" are nervous and agitated over the thought of gay marriage/civil unions/HIV and transgender issues in Massachusetts. And if you dare call them on it, suddenly you are accused of being anti-semetic. I am a progressive and I am not anti-semetic. What I don't like is seeing people use that word to gather support for so called "progressive" candidates who actually hurt the progressive cause by their unprofessional behavior(i.e. "Princess Rebecca"). For nearly 100 years, the southern states of the United States voted for the Democratic Party. These southern states were often called the "Solid South" and they were not liberal states either. In reality, these states were really conservative. When the Democratic Party began inserting language regarding Civil Rights for African Americans and Equal Rights for women, these states bolted to the States Rights Party or the Republican Party. Today, the Democratic Party is lucky to take a state or two below the Mason-Dixon line in a Presidential election. Word to the wise...labels do not mean anything. Sometimes "progressives" are really conservatives in disguise.
Posted by: No Friend of Princess Rebecca | July 15, 2007 at 01:12 PM
To clarify, I don't know this Rebecca woman. I don't even live in Ward 6.
If she sucks so bad and you have good evidence for it, then she'll lose.
BTW, I'm all for stopping the flow of free goodies for any nation in the ME.
I don't care what people call themselves. If they show me their record and evidence they believe in pragmatic liberal principles then I'll vote for them.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 15, 2007 at 03:03 PM
Some of Rebekah's supporters oppose gay marriage and want to drop atomic bombs? Can you name these people?
Posted by: Ron Newman | July 15, 2007 at 06:06 PM
Shhh... Never disturb people in the middle of their delusional fantasies!
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 15, 2007 at 06:28 PM
I call myself a progressive, currently work two jobs to pay the loans that I owe to college, and CHOSE to move to Somerville and make a life here because I truly enjoy living with all of the people who live here. My mother worked three jobs while I was growing up just to pay for housing and food for my brother and I. I worked full time through college, and again through grad school (the first in my family to achieve this diploma). My family has definitely had to struggle, and I work hard each and every day to make a difference for the young people of Somerville, just so that I can go work at a restaurant most nights to pay the bills. Weird how once we talk to one another we find that there are many similarities between us, and many people have to struggle.
Posted by: Talk about generalizations | July 15, 2007 at 08:07 PM
I call myself a progressive, currently work two jobs to pay the loans that I owe to college, and CHOSE to move to Somerville and make a life here because I truly enjoy living with all of the people who live here. My mother worked three jobs while I was growing up just to pay for housing and food for my brother and I. I worked full time through college, and again through grad school (the first in my family to achieve this diploma). My family has definitely had to struggle, and I work hard each and every day to make a difference for the young people of Somerville, just so that I can go work at a restaurant most nights to pay the bills. Weird how once we talk to one another we find that there are many similarities between us, and many people have to struggle.
Posted by: Talk about generalizations | July 15, 2007 at 08:08 PM
JESUS, MARTHA AND JOSE..........
You shit for brains are all giving me a bloody freakin headache.
Someone please, for the love of all that is holy, stop these people blogging. It gives true loonies like me a bad name.
Brick, I adore you. You are such a voice of sanity in a world gone almost completely mad.
Dr. Mrs. McCarthy
Posted by: Dr. Mrs. McCarthy | July 15, 2007 at 08:40 PM
Dr. Mrs. McCarthy could you please spill the beans you promised? That's the cause of all the excitement, I suspect :)
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 15, 2007 at 09:16 PM
In response to "Ron Newman". Yes, I could definitely name a few, and he might just know of a few as well. However, these people do not hold public office, and frankly I don't think that they would appreciate being "outed" as closet conservatives. But one member of "Princess Rebecca's" close coterie of "progressive" supporters has taken the lead(probably at her highness's behest) and reportedly tried to threaten and intimidate candidate Chisholm by telephone into not running for Ward Six Alderman. This same character, who reportedly has a criminal record, actually went to candidate Chisholm's house and tried to get inside and have a confrontation with the candidate. To those who are reading this commentary, this is not "progressivism". This is Marxism and Stalinism. These tactics are employed by right wing third world countries and in Russia and the Middle East. The last time I checked, we lived in the United States of America. This country was built on participation in the democratic process. We are a free country and candidates for public office should be allowed to run for office and the voters should decide who they wish to have represent them. True "progressives" should welcome this process, not try to stifle it through threats. Yet, "Princess Rebecca" apparently feels that the position of Ward Six Alderman now belongs to her, as though it were her own personal property. Accordingly, it comes as no surprise that she has alienated everyone on the Board of Alderman and no one takes her seriously. She has trivilized the office and done a disservice to the voters of Ward Six. Thank goodness that we live in a democracy and not a kingdom. For Madame Du Princess will have to answer to the will of her appointing authorities...the voters in November. These are the same voters that she has forgotten, ignored, and turned her nose up at for the past year and a half. To the voters of Ward Six I say, let the dethroning of "Princess Rebecca" begin. After all, she has only herself to blame.
Posted by: No Friend of Princess Rebecca | July 15, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Dear Dr. Mrs. McCarthy,
Thank you so much for your nice compliment. Coming from a voice of reason and experience it is much appreciated.
I don't know where all of these loonies are coming from but from the looks of it we are in for a ride on the Magical Mystery Tour!
Posted by: brickbottom | July 16, 2007 at 12:13 AM
I'm not questioning what you described. But, the question is: how would people know you are not making all of this up? Usual dilemma.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 16, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Somerville Resident,
Isn't it time for lights out?
Posted by: brickbottom | July 16, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I'm starting to wonder if "No Friend of Princess Rebecca" is Mr. Chisholm himself.
Posted by: Ron Newman | July 16, 2007 at 12:46 AM
Ron - I was thinking the same thing. Your detective badge is in the mail.
Anyone found any campaign literature from the Perfessor's campaigns against Jack Connolly (who if he ran as a write-in against these two would probably win hands-down)? The only thing I've run across on line is on Phil Hyde's Timesizing website, who suggests that the Perfessor was reported to have received $100,000 to collect 7,000 signatures for former senatorial candidate/gadfly Jack E. Robinson.
Which suggests one of two things. One, that the good Prof. is a shrewd businessman (by extracting that amount of money from Mr. Robinsonfor that amount of work). Or two, that by allying himself with such a loon as Mr. Robinson, that the Perfessor is certainly on at least a parallel track (if not the same one) to loondom as Robinson.
I suspect both.
Posted by: Tricky | July 16, 2007 at 01:09 AM
"He went on to explain that his priorities, if elected, would be to push Green Technology, paying more attention to public safety issues and creating a stronger relationship with Tufts University."
What the heck does that even mean? I can't really pinpoint what kind of policies this guy would implement. How about commenting on stuff that is actually happening in our city.
Posted by: Solh Zendeh | July 16, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Hi Everyone,
Just a couple of clarifications on what has been said:
1. On my work for Mr. Robinson, the amount the newspapers listed ($100,000) was the total amount he had spent on the campaign. What I was paid can be
researched through reports to the FEC. Such a fee, were it to have been the case, would not have been "shrewd,"
rather it would have been excessive and exorbitant.
2. Helping candidates get on the ballot does not
mean your politics is the same as the candidate you assist. We also helped Peter Galbraith, former Clinton ambassador to Croatia, access the ballot for congress,
but that no more makes me ambassador material than working for Mr. Robinson makes me "a loon."
3. Considering how few citizens are running for public office, I think it would be a public service to
reign in as much as possible (without violating free speech) the name calling. There are plenty of issues to be passionate about, so I'm asking everyone supporting me to show the incumbent some respect.
4. Consequently, I'm not the person posting that you suggest. It's nice to know that Ron is still around
and has his interesting outlook on the issues. I look forward to chatting with him out there on the hustings.
5. As for the specificity of the platform, I would urge Solh Zendeh to be patient. It's coming.
I would also like Solh's take on what issues are perceived to be "happening in our city." Thanks.
Posted by: Charles Chisholm | July 16, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Nicely put, Charles.
Posted by: Not so Fast | July 16, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Tricky,
And once again you are worthy of the "McCarthy Cup for Reasoning". Charles is not as rich as Robinson, but they both have taken their fare share of rides in the Yellow Submarine. I looked in all my trunks I have in storage under the altar here in LSOP's chapel. Can't seem to locate the box labelled "CC Flops".
Perhaps Butters Newman can call Jack's Back Connolly. I know he saved every single piece of lit Charles ever concocted for the hapless voters of Cambriville. Some of the stuff was worthy of bronzing.
See You In the Hamptons,
Dr. Mrs. McCarthy
Posted by: Dr. Mrs. McCarthy | July 16, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I do not have any of Chisholm's literature (nor any of Jack's), but I may have issues of the Somerville Community News* that described some of Charlie's campaign activities. I'll look for them over the next few weeks.
* not to be confused with the Somerville News. The Community News was a monthly paper that competed with both the News and the Journal during the 1980s and early 90s.
Posted by: Ron Newman | July 16, 2007 at 01:01 PM
I'm looking forward to hearing from Charlie again. The guy's a couple of wrenches short of a toolbox but I always found him amusing and entertaining in a conspiratorial sort of way. I don't have any of the old literature around any more from the last campaign, but I wish I did. The good Dr. Mrs. McCarthy will stumble across it sooner or later, just keep looking baby.
I might be confusing him with someone else but it seems he wasn't much of a friend to MW Carr when I was working there. Not that it matters since Rebecca probably doesn't even know who MW Carr is.
If Newman has an archive of the "Communist-unity News"* he should find all the stuff on Charlie, or at least there version, in there. Try looking under the old "Isvestia" file, the one with the hammer and sicle on it.
Wasn't there a third guy who took out Ward 6 papers? Did he turn them in or is it just going to be Nanny and the Professor?
*Don't worry Newman, we could never confuse it with the Somerville News, a paper that tells it like it is and promotes such things as freedom of land ownership and besides I thought competition wasn't allowed in a Communistic society?
Posted by: PersonDavis... | July 16, 2007 at 01:33 PM
My guess is Count Chisholm is back for one reason. My view/ guess is that he is being stealthly supported and paid by Joey Curtakoty to occupy a real pain in the neck (aka Rebecca G.)...
I dont have any inside info on this- but I dont see any other motivation the man would have.
As for our friend Rebecca- get ready to taste the old fashion campaign that we came to know and love in Somerville. If Charles holds true to his historical form- you will be in for a tough fall of negative pieces being cranked out by the Count in his dark cellar each night. Joining him in total stealth form will a host of other angry people- who unfortunately will make for a miserable time for you and your family.
I wouldnt wish this on anyone- and most particularly a young neophyte to Somerville politics. But as they say all is fair in love and war. And you have made the current administration go to the war with you via their decoy Count Chisholm.
Posted by: observer | July 16, 2007 at 01:51 PM
I’ll kindly thank the professor for his remarks, and attempt to address his concerns.
1 – I’ll refrain from comment on the finances of the Robinson campaign until I can view the FEC report. Indeed, the amount did indeed seem excessive and exorbitant for the number of signatures collected. I’m not sure where the “shrewd” comment came from (besides sleep deprivation), because in this case, there was probably a fixed amount per signature agreed on beforehand, and not anyone holding out for cold, hard cash. If Phil Hyde hasn’t timesized himself out of existence yet, perhaps he see fit to change the erroneous information on his website.
Which is pretty much the only information regarding the Professor on the internet that predates than his current candidacy. There’s no “virtual” Charles Chisholm out there yet (have you considered a website?)
2 – Were the case of helping candidates with different politics as one’s own such a noble cause. However, theory and practice diverge frequently, and quite widely in the political arena. If someone showed up here with a petition trying to get Mitt Romney on the presidential ballot I’d shoo them off the porch. If someone suggested I could make 10 cents a signature petitioning to get Mitt on the ballot, I’d probably assault them. Opportunity knocks, but you don’t always have to answer the door.
(But you don’t consider yourself ambassador material? I’m sure the good Dr. Mrs. McCarthy would consider you highly for the position of Cambrivlle Ambassador to Moultonborough, NH…)
3 – Point taken on the name calling. Good luck reining in this website though. When there’s blood in the water, the sharks come out. In this case, it’s the combination of Newstalk referring to “Princess Rebekah” (during the week in question, I don’t think Newstalk mentioned the last name of anyone remotely progressive) plus Norton’s chumming the waters with this current article, which can charitably be described as a “puff piece”.
Seriously – can we get a moratorium on the phrase “lifelong Somerville resident”? You're wondering why newcomers don't get involved around here, when they have to see that little phrase on pretty much every piece of campaign literature every two years?
4 – Ron’s pretty perceptive. Whoever “No Friend of Princess Rebecca” is, there’s certainly enough stylistic (neo-LaRoucheian? John Birch? There’s must be an adjective out there for that post…) evidence there for him to make a connection. From 1993, I certainly recall seeing campaign information against Connolly that certainly had a Neanderthal flair to it. Maybe that’s what Ron’s on to.
5 – The issues. Thank you. We’ll be waiting.
Posted by: Tricky | July 16, 2007 at 01:54 PM
Thanks Charles - that was a good post. I'm in Ward 5 so you don't really need to campaign to me ;) But for the record, I think it would be useful for all candidates to remark on subjects such as:
- drug related issues: have you studied what causes an up tick in drug use and related crime (gangs, theft, needle litter etc), and the most cost effective ways to combat this.
- local verses national or chain stores. Do you have an opinion on this issue, and if so what would you do to encourage local proprietorships.
- green line/community path - this is likely the single most important thing that will happen to somerville since rent control was repealed in cambridge. It has the potential to completely change neighborhoods. Do you have a vision for how this project would go forward. The community/bike path is something I am personally very interested in seeing go forward asap.
- assembly square - I don't even know how to approach this since it's such a mess. But I would love to hear candidates briefly explain what they envision happening there. I know we won't get what I personally want, but what are the choices at this point.
Thanks again, I appreciate any time you spend talking about these or other issues that are important to you.
Posted by: Solh Zendeh | July 16, 2007 at 02:00 PM
All great points, Ron, Tricky & Observer!
Regarding the “lifelong Somerville resident” phrase: To me, that it a negative. I have less respect for individuals who have spent all their life in the same little town than I have for people who have lived in many different places and, as a result, have seen more and are more open to new ideas.
Posted by: Somerville Resident | July 16, 2007 at 02:09 PM
To me, it's neither a positive nor a negative. It doesn't really tell you much one way or the other. You can be 21 years old and be a "lifelong Someville resident", or you could live here for 45 years and not be one.
Posted by: Ron Newman | July 16, 2007 at 02:21 PM
But what it tells you, and what it suggests are two different things though. To some extent, newcomers may read it as "You're not from here, you'll never be from here."
Mrs. Tricky and I have found it mildly amusing when we moved to town, obviously less so now.
Which is nothing against people who have lived here their entire lives. (The Trickettes are "lifelong Somerville residents") This town would not be the same without them, and something needs to be done to allow people who want to stay here to be able to afford it. (Tax breaks, some sort of city reverse mortgage program, whatever) But identifying yourself as such should be used judiciously instead of a blanket proclamation bound to turn off more than a few people.
- - -
I remember (on the old BBS) having the temerity to suggest that Kate Murray might make a good pick for school committee from Ward 5 because she wasn't from here - boy, did that bring miserable out of the woodwork. How dare someone suggest an outsider would know anything about what's good for the Somerville schools, etc., when it's exactly an outsider that that insulated little board needed at that time.
Posted by: Tricky | July 16, 2007 at 02:48 PM
I'm quite proud of living in Somerville for over half a century (being kind to myself). But Somerville is a quaint town in the bible belt, either. How much more diverse can a place be than adjacent to Boston and Cambridge, where the world comes to you. I've had the opportunity to visit thirty states, five Canadian provinces, three European cities (in three countries), and the Bahamas. There is more to this world than Somerville, but it's still home to me. While many of my stays abroad were up to three months, and I learned much from other people, I still feel lucky to always return here.
As long as you want to bring the best ideas home, what's wrong with that?
As for your issues, I really do agree that the Green Line to Union Square and to the rest of Somerville would be great. Maybe we could have the MBTA put a bike path over it so people could bike to work as well as ride the T. Just a thought. Local stores create character, like P-Town and Key West. What will make Davis Square even more attractive would be more
local owned shops. I'm glad the Mayor and the View have come to terms, but new and creative approaches to revenue need to be created. Just a few thoughts for now.
Posted by: Charles Chisholm | July 16, 2007 at 03:16 PM
sorry for the typo "Somerville isn't.....,either."
Posted by: Charles Chisholm | July 16, 2007 at 03:21 PM
I'd be interested in hearing what Candidate Chisholm thinks are the ward's biggest issues are and how he'd try to address them.
I'll start ... I happen to think the One Davis Square project is an eyesore and a shame to have as the flagship of the Square ... but I gather that had been given the go-ahead before Gewirtz was elected. The Alderman needs to be tough enough to stand up against the special interests of the Developers. I'm not saying don't develop, I'm suggesting some very thoughtful oversight of the planning and zoning areas. Union Square is the next one to be destroyed unless the Developers are stopped, although I realize that's outside your domain.
Thank you.
Posted by: it *is* funny | July 16, 2007 at 03:36 PM
Can you tell us how your approach to these issues would differ from the incumbent's (or from Jack Connolly's, for that matter)?
Posted by: Ron Newman | July 16, 2007 at 03:54 PM
In certain parts of the city, how long someone has lived in Somerville has little or nothing to do with whether they should be elected to office. Obviously Rebekah Gerwitz connected with voters last time around.
Personally, I've lived in Somerville for around 6 years--have a family (one child not school age yet), own a home in the Davis area. Professional, college eduacated--I think i'm typical of many of my neighbors. I have a few issues that matter to me--good schools, taxes, crime...There's no reason those issues cannot be addressed by caring and intelligent people regardless of Somerville longevity. And as Charles said, there are so few people who are willing to devote themselves to public service, let's dispense with the idiotic personal attacks.
Posted by: Antoine Walker | July 16, 2007 at 04:10 PM
Antoine
I am a "lifelong resident of Somerville". I care very much about the future of Somerville. Someone like yourself who has been here a relatively short time and has a young family should care even more about Somerville IF you plan to stay in here. I would like to see elected officials who have families and own property because they are more invested in the future of the city. The old Somerville is not coming back, but if we cannot make this city attractive to young families to stay and send their children to our public schools this city will not have a bright future.
Newcomers are not the problem, its the people with young children who are leaving that are the problem.
Posted by: Some Ole Villen | July 16, 2007 at 04:36 PM