Docket #0257 - Vote NO on the Current Ordinance to Establish a Planning Department in the city of Boston, ending decades of harm, rethinking a better approach to planning

[Rodney Singleton]

Councillor Colletta,

While I fully support a city planning department, accountable to the people of Boston, the current proposed city planning ordinance, even with amendments thus far, falls short of what is needed and requires a NO vote in order to provide time to get it right. And I would encourage those I've shared this email with to reply in support of a NO vote for the following reasons:

• No city oversight of urban renewal zones: unchecked power strengthened, when we need a democratized, engaged approach.
• Lack of independence between the BRA Board and Zoning Commission: continued, wink and rubber stamp with no checks and balances, despite this planning ordinance forming a shiny new city planning department that seemingly solves all our development problems.
• Planning and Development Review, reporting to the same leadership is a recipe for the same old BRA conflict of interest that has perpetuated six decades of mistrust.
• Lack of organizational independence between the Planning and Development Review Departments.
• Lack of financial transparency: Annual financial reporting will not be the oversight check step needed to control development practices in Boston we know need improvement, with regard to conflicts of interest and special interests.
• Community Panels used to be part of the original city Planning board of the 60s: this kind of community engagement is required and missing from this ordinance.
• Motivation for keeping harmful eminent domain powers rebranded from blight to Equity, Affordability and Resilience still steals intergenerational wealth building from black, brown and immigrant Bosontonian's as it did back in the 60s. We all admit was wrong and can never be made right no matter how many arbitrary good words, interpreted differently from other folks perspective, one tries to use to defend these powers. Theft is theft!!!  

I have close insight to the last point in the list, as this is what happened to my family home in the 60s.

From the BPDA furnished map view below you'll note two squares and a line. The line is what used to be Munroe Street in the early 60s that was upended by the taking of land and plans for the new development. The large square is where my home once stood, at 21 Munroe Street. The smaller square is where my family lived from 1965 to 1979, 44 Hazelwood Court, Marksdale Gardens, the new developemtn. Our family went from owning a home to renting one -- where is the equity in that deal, Mayor Wu?!

This is the order of taking for all of the homes that were claimed for the Marksdale Gardens development...

But, this is an amendment to a taking that was executed in 1998. Our home was taken in 1963 and below is what the neighborhood looked like prior to the taking. The largest square box in red was my old elementary school, the Boardman, where I attended grades K-2. The smaller rectangle to the right of that was 21 Munroe Street, our family home. And all the way to the bottom left, the owner, Severlin B. Singleton, my grandfather.

Munroe Street used to go clear through to Warren Street, and Ottawa, Sherman and Bower Streets were about where MLK Blvd. is now.

Our land and home was taken in 1963 and some of the land, including where our home used to be, was conveyed to the YMCA in 1998 for whatever they wanted it for. So the BRA took our land, sat on it for 35 years, then conveyed the land to the YMCA, and built nothing. That's a bait and switch if ever I've seen one -- your home is blighted, and will be taken, demolished, and will be left unproductive for 35 years, and then will be given away. Should our family sue for restitution for loss of time and equity?

This harm was keenly felt in District 7.

What was done in the 60s was meant to address blight and urban decay. Now the justification for using the same harmful powers will be for Equity, Affordability, and Resilience. And we get it, on the one hand, property assets must be in the marketplace in order to appreciate in value, where market forces rule the day. On the other hand, the policy Boston and many other municipalities have employed to ensure affordability is to remove the property assets from the marketplace altogether and this is seen as better policy than the manipulative practices of the past.

Case in point, Washington Park in the early 1960s, where my old home used to be. Only a handful of homes survived this instrument of taking. If you then tally up what was lost, you come up with about 130 homes, multiplied by the going Roxbury rate of multi-family dwellings, say the $1.2 million I heard a developer quote in a recent community meeting, and you see $156 million in equity and intergenerational wealth has been lost.

Not only did we lose all that equity and wealth building, but the entire area was intentionally held economically hostage for 40 years to address blight. We all agree this was the wrong thing to do. Was the cost worth it?! Yet, we're about to cause the same harm, but for different reasons. Wrong is wrong, no matter what reasons we attach!

The Wu administration needs to stop this madness and sunset the BRA, as she said she would in her white paper of 2019, when she was a city councillor. That's why we all supported and voted her into office as mayor. This is also a real breach of trust for many of us and we won't forget it.

-Rodney Singleton

44 Cedar Street

Roxbury MA, 02119

[Rodney Singleton]

Councillor Colletta,

I'm quoting from an excellent letter sent to you this morning, penned by my Back Bay neighbor Martyn Roetter, where he notes a member of the council recognizes efforts to amend this ordinance thus far only "rebrand the status quo." 

What is the point then and what are we doing?!

The council is making a terrible mistake, at a rare opportunity to make profound differences that matter to all people in our city, by trying to rush and pass a patchwork of changes to this ordinance that in the end will not have the desired impact all Bostonians deserve!

Please hear us and VOTE NO, to give more time to get this right!

"Passage of this ordinance will be a once in a lifetime mistake. It will even make matters worse in some respects as well as perpetuate fundamental problems and sources of harm identified in the 2019 Wu Report  "Fixing Boston’s Broken Development Process.” As one Councilor remarked during the Working Meeting on March 22^nd the changes proposed in the ordinance merely amount to a rebranding of the status quo under its current leadership. It will operate with the same culture that has not solved the unsatisfactory and growing lack of affordable housing for many income groups, and the paucity of open spaces and other amenities in some Boston neighborhoods.  It has not reduced or removed  and has even sustained deplorable inequities in opportunities for wealth generation for some communities of residents. Along with other factors these inequities have contributed to the persistence of vastly disparate conditions between neighborhoods and groups leading to astounding differences in life expectancy within the city (https://www.wbur.org/news/2023/05/11/boston-life-expectancy-gap-back-bay-roxbury). These are the challenges we are now trying to confront and overcome. Tackling them successfully will require genuine reform of “Boston’s Broken Development Process,” not the superficial relabeling that is envisaged in this ordinance. The ordinance does little if anything to remove underlying causes and sources of harm. They have persisted over many years, shielded from independent scrutiny by the opacity shrouding the BRA's financial and other operations."

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 1:04 PM Rodney Singleton <rodne...@gmail.com> wrote:

Councillor Colletta,

While I fully support a city planning department, accountable to the people of Boston, the current proposed city planning ordinance, even with amendments thus far, falls short of what is needed and requires a NO vote in order to provide time to get it right. And I would encourage those I've shared this email with to reply in support of a NO vote for the following reasons:

• No city oversight of urban renewal zones: unchecked power strengthened, when we need a democratized, engaged approach.

• Lack of independence between the BRA Board and Zoning Commission: continued, wink and rubber stamp with no checks and balances, despite this planning ordinance forming a shiny new city planning department that seemingly solves all of our development problems.

• Planning and Development Review, reporting to the same leadership is a recipe for the same old BRA conflict of interest that has perpetuated six decades of mistrust.
• Lack of organizational independence between the Planning and Development Review Departments.
• Lack of financial transparency: Annual financial reporting will not be the oversight check step needed to control development practices in Boston we know need improvement, with regard to conflicts of interest and special interests.
• Community Panels used to be part of the original city Planning board of the 60s: this kind of community engagement is required and missing from this ordinance.

• Motivation for keeping harmful eminent domain powers rebranded from blight to Equity, Affordability and Resilience still steals intergenerational wealth building from black, brown and immigrant Bosontonian's as it did back in the 60s. We all admit this was wrong and can never be made right no matter how many arbitrary good words, interpreted differently from other folks perspective, one tries to use to defend these powers. Theft is theft!!!  

I have close insight to the last point in the list, as this is what happened to my family home in the 60s.

From the BPDA furnished map view below you'll note two squares and a line. The line is what used to be Munroe Street in the early 60s that was upended by the taking of land and plans for the new development. The large square is where my home once stood, at 21 Munroe Street. The smaller square is where my family lived from 1965 to 1979, 44 Hazelwood Court, Marksdale Gardens, the new development. Our family went from owning a home to renting one -- where is the equity in that deal, Mayor Wu?!

This is the order of taking for all of the homes that were claimed for the Marksdale Gardens development...

But, this is an amendment to a taking that was executed in 1998. Our home was taken in 1963 and below is what the neighborhood looked like prior to the taking. The largest square box in red was my old elementary school, the Boardman, where I attended grades K-2. The smaller rectangle to the right of that was 21 Munroe Street, our family home. And all the way to the bottom left, the owner, Severlin B. Singleton, my grandfather.

Munroe Street used to go clear through to Warren Street, and Ottawa, Sherman and Bower Streets were about where MLK Blvd. is now.

Our land and home was taken in 1963 and some of the land, including where our home used to be, was conveyed to the YMCA in 1998 for whatever they wanted it for. So the BRA took our land, sat on it for 35 years, then conveyed the land to the YMCA, and built nothing. That's a bait and switch if ever I've seen one -- your home is blighted, and will be taken, demolished, and will be left unproductive for 35 years, and then will be given away. Should our family sue for restitution for loss of time and equity?

This harm was keenly felt in District 7.

What was done in the 60s was meant to address blight and urban decay. Now the justification for using the same harmful powers will be for Equity, Affordability, and Resilience. And we get it, on the one hand, property assets must be in the marketplace in order to appreciate in value, where market forces rule the day. On the other hand, the policy Boston and many other municipalities have employed to ensure affordability is to remove the property assets from the marketplace altogether and this is seen as better policy than the manipulative practices of the past.

Case in point, Washington Park in the early 1960s, where my old home used to be. Only a handful of homes survived this instrument of taking. If you then tally up what was lost, you come up with about 130 homes, multiplied by the going Roxbury rate of multi-family dwellings, say the $1.2 million I heard a developer quote in a recent community meeting, and you see $156 million in equity and intergenerational wealth has been lost.

Not only did we lose all that equity and wealth building, but the entire area was intentionally held economically hostage for 40 years to address blight. We all agree this was the wrong thing to do. Was the cost worth it?! Yet, we're about to cause the same harm, but for different reasons. Wrong is wrong, no matter what reasons we attach!

The Wu administration needs to stop this madness and sunset the BRA, as she said she would in her white paper of 2019, when she was a city councillor. That's why we all supported and voted her into office as mayor. This is also a real breach of trust for many of us and we won't forget it.

-Rodney Singleton

44 Cedar Street 

Roxbury MA, 02119 (617) 417-5471 (cell)

 

 

[Rodney Singleton]

Councillors Worrell, Louijeune, Santana and Pepen,

Considering the gravity of today's vote on the ordinance to create a city planning department each of you face, I'd like to share some thoughts, precipitated by a neighbor who shared a story of fate, that got me thinking about how history plays out sometimes. We'll never know how our stories intersect with one another, but often they do.

On Monday night I attended a very contentious meeting at the William Monroe Trotter Elementary School (I'm an alum: 1969-1972), meant to be a community listening session for the redevelopment of White Stadium. At issue: the privatization of public park lands; neighborhood access; displacement of BPS athletic programming; parking and transportation; noise; disrespect; disrespect; and more disrespect.

All public testimony made the point. Given it was a listening session, liberal community testimony was encouraged, and the community was heard loud and clear. 

The testimony of Dr. Jean McGuire was important for its impact, yes, but also for how it binds our collective voice and stories. Hands down Dr. Mcguire is one of my Sheros. Her testimony is attached.

Dr. Mcguire is a staunch advocate of many causes, the notable here being a civil rights soldier, lover of park lands, open spaces, access for all, especially children and educational equity. We all were horrified to hear that she was attacked in Franklin Park, and overjoyed when she resumed her walks and tenacious advocacy.      

I've known Dr. McGuire since I was a kid. She reminds me of my 92 year old mother -- both of them always getting into good trouble.

As I'm listening to Dr. McGuire's testimony, and other testimony, talking about privatization, public access, parking, urban renewal, redlining, disrespect, trust, the O'Bryant, where we happen to be, and all of it...

It hit me! We're in a listening session in a school auditorium, where the school is named after a civil right activist, Trotter, who fought against the accommodationist race policies of Booker T. Washington (no we don't want accommodation, we want real equity!), talking about a city resource in White Stadium that should have never been given over to private hands, hearing the testimony of another civil rights activist and educator, Dr. Jean McGuire, who founded METCO (Metropolitan Council for Educational Opportunity), after the Boardman school (see below), an example of educational inequity and catalyst to METCO efforts, was raised in the early 60s, using the same harmful urban renewal powers that leveled the West End and vast parts of Roxbury (Washington Park urban renewal zone), trying to convince this city council, some of whom are beneficiaries of the METCO program and Dr. Mcguire's educational advocacy, to consider that keeping harmful urban renewal powers of this ordinance white washes away efforts by Dr. McGuire, Chuck Turner (may he rest in power) and a host of others to protect Roxbury from the city planning a highway through our neighborhood.

In hearings, the BPDA admitted to cheating on the current definition of blight to take our land. What makes us think they won't continue to cheat and game land takings under new definitions of Equity, Affordability, and Resilience? Make no mistake, land takings are easily rationalized under resilience when the lowlands of Boston get flooded out and all that's left is Roxbury and its highland nature. If not abused under this mayor and administration, any mayor and administration after will be able to abuse these definitions. 

Our history is all spelled out, and laid bare. Are we doomed to repeat this history, by supporting this ordinance and all its harmful powers again?! Or can our fate and history be turned to providence?

Please, each of you, vote the conscience of your constituency, its interests, recognizing the shoulders and legacy on which you now stand, not pressured by someone else's countdown clock and their possible political gain, should always be our path forward.

Thank you in advance for your time and engagement.

Rodney Singleton

44 Cedar Street

Roxbury, MA 02119

(617) 417-5471 (cell) 

 IMG_0368.mov