voting information

[Pat Jehlen]

Dear USNC Neighbors,

Many of us are wondering what the breakdown of residents/workers/volunteers/owners in the voting was.  Turnout was great!  

Yet we found in canvassing that - even a couple of days before voting - most residents and small business owners didn't know about the project.   At 7 pm on Wednesday, one employer called to say they had just learned about it, too late to inform their staff and members.

The by-laws and process were designed for Union Square, where small businesses, including many immigrant-owned ones, would be impacted by a large development.  Here, the developer was able to inform and mobilize its tenants' workers and volunteers to vote in favor.  Residents were very disadvantaged in contacting potential voters about their concerns in a very short time.

We have heard that many people who voted were construction workers.  We want to know where and when they were working in the catchment area.  

I hope you have preserved the membership forms, so we can understand how many voters were residents, workers, volunteers, and owners of businesses and property.  

In a public election, we would know who voted, including their addresses and if they registered the same day.

Since many city councilors have said they would vote for the zoning if the CBA passed, this is part of the public process and should be part of the public record.

USNC members have taken on enormous work and responsibility!  Transparency is part of that responsibility.  Please immediately count and report at least the numbers of voters in each category or residents, workers, volunteers and owners.   If you need volunteer assistance, I'm sure we could recruit volunteers of different opinions.  

This is not just an issue for Somernova.  Neighborhood Councils are being formed elsewhere.  The by-laws are crucial.  All the councils should consider who they represent and empower, learning from this and other experiences.

Please let us know information about the voters as soon as possible.

Thank you,

Pat Jehlen

[Kevin Dickinson]

Hello Pat,

Thank you for your inquiry. I did see a large number of construction workers voting in favor of their own interest.

At the time I did wonder to myself who has the greater interest and should that vote be weighted.

I voted in favor and live on top of central hill, which allows me not to be impacted by the development, however, i still recognizing the more important vote of the people in the six blocks of the rezoning.  And that there is no greueenity that the developer would say,  i will in accordance with the current zoning give nothing to the community and build anyway.

If a review of the vote should take place (I think it should) it would show who live inside and beside the proposed project and those that don't. 

It reminds me of the saying, dont look a gift hourse in the mouth.

I am also reminded that my time on this plante is short and that what we build or allow to be built will affect the lives of those that come 10, 20, 30 years and beyond my dealth and do I not a least owe them another pass?

Maybe the range of the vote was to broad. It should have been limited to those that can prove they live (not work) and want to rise a child in that six block zone. If that was the case I would not have been allowed to vote.

Kevin 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USNC Public" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usnc-public...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usnc-public/CANdgoKqx7NcJibHBd_ABBsuh%2BuAJELYfS6wg1A%3DTSrd8c%2BmNfw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kate Lila Wheeler]

Thanks🫤 the big issue was calling it democratic while  weighting the eligibility against the nearby residents and muting our requests while sweetening the pot with treats for others. I thought the threat to give nothing indicated where the developers heart really was despite all the blabla ebiug 'creating community'. I don't blame the unions for wanting the commitment or  fir trying their best ...

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usnc-public/CAE%2Bw3jHCY_RsxQfqan3mjxHu%3DnOBuTk3TsPBcPHXC11ZuxMRnw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pat Jehlen]

The main question I'm raising is whether the current voting eligibility makes sense now, especially in places like this, and in the 3 new NCs.

In order to think about it, and decide if we need to amend anything, I think we need the information on who voted, and then decide who should be represented in each case.  It's all new, and very different from public elections or other membership organizations.

We can't learn from experience without information.

No one is accusing USNC of not following the bylaws, though some have raised questions about identification provided.

USNC does amazing work with all volunteers and few resources.  

On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 3:39 PM Renee Scott <renee...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear USNC neighbors,

It seems to me that there is a simple question on the table: did the USNC board follow the USNC bylaws for the CBA process and subsequent vote? If the answer is yes, then as much as any individual may be upset with the results, the results stand. 

Any member who does not like the bylaws as written could propose a change to them (see Article 15). 

Warmly,

Renée

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usnc-public/CABb8Q1DJ76SqwobXQtHqyGOcbX-9BSA5dXie%3Dt-w6%3D-cLs4zVw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Daniel Coughlin]

Can anyone share where it outlines who is eligible to vote on the CBA, specifically? It could clear up a lot of concern. I personally have never seen anything more specific than “residents, workers and volunteers” are eligible. But there must be more to it - defining what constitutes a worker and volunteer in the catchment area. Residents need proof of residency. What proof did works and volunteers need to provide? 

The participation in the vote was unprecedented. It stood out as significant to everyone including city councilors and the USNC board. For reference, it was reported that only 45 people voted in the USNC Board elections, two weeks prior. If these facts are true the community has every right to understand who participated in such great numbers. If the USNC doesn’t know who participated in the CBA vote, the community has every right to be concerned. 

Please note that a Boston.com article from 2 days ago, quoting both USNC Board members and Rafi representatives was filled with inaccuracies, including the false claim that more than 2200 Somerville residents voted on the CBA. These types of obvious mistakes have people confused and frustrated. 

Could the USNC please help clarify some basic community questions, so that everyone can feel good about the process? Transparency can’t stop now. 

Dan 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "somernovaneighbors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to somernovaneighb...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/somernovaneighbors/CANdgoKrezHNy0jbLKJRHhpHBxTeLR9tUV%2B3JoYJ3V7Y3sXKTCw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Andy Greenspon]

Hi all,

(I am only on the USNC-public list, so that is the listserv this message is going out to.)

I participated in the USNC Working Group that prepared the initial bylaws, held the bylaw ratification vote, and held the first board elections for the USNC in 2017. I have served on the USNC board and was co-chair for two years. Since then, financial and personal considerations led me to have to move out of the district, so I did not vote in this CBA referendum, nor do I have a personal stake in whether Somernova redevelops or not. I am just giving my own personal opinion below. (As sent in another email, the USNC board will meet and prepare their own response to questions asked above.)

-------------------

The bylaws are publicly viewable on the USNC website: https://sites.google.com/view/usnc/board-bylaws

To reference the specific parts people have asked about:

Article 16—Community Benefits Agreement

...In order to approve a CBA as negotiated, the Neighborhood Council Board will require support from 2⁄3 majority of the Neighborhood Council Membership voting in a ballot vote over the course of one day....

Section 3.2: Membership of the Neighborhood Council
Membership in the Union Square Neighborhood Council shall be open to any resident, property owner, business owner, or employee within the Union Square neighborhood geographic boundary at any point in time during the preceding 12-month period. Residents, as described herein, shall include persons who lack a permanent address but receive support services within the Union Square neighborhood geographic boundary. Somerville residents who regularly volunteer at organizations/agencies within the boundary shall also have all the rights of other members.

-------------------

I don't think it's that difficult to provide validation. For residency, a lease, a utility bill, a bank statement, etc. For workers, a paystub, or signed document by the employer's company, with address within the geographic boundary. For volunteers, I also assume a signed document by the organization that says the person has been an X volunteer for X amount of time at X cadence of hours, with the address of the organization within the geographic boundaries of the Square.

Pat asked questions that others may want to take up for the future of neighborhood councils. Many of the people who were on the Working Group that put together the bylaws are no longer involved with the USNC - that was all put together around 8 years ago at this point. I have old emails with minutes from some of those Working Group meetings, though I would have to do a more rigorous search to put them together. If anyone is truly curious and wants to take a deep dive into that, they are welcome to direct message me. From a cursory review and my own recollection, the primary discussion was how open vs. more restrictive to make USNC membership - each option has trade offs. There was a lot of discussion about how business owners and workers have a large stake in the future of the Square as well as residents. 

The existing bylaws have a process to amend them, if Pat is suggesting it. However, one should think carefully about the reasoning for proposing any amendment that might restrict membership to the USNC. Is there an overarching long-term purpose, or is it simply because one is unhappy with how this specific vote turned out? If one wishes to remove workers from eligibility, I think to be fair you would have to remove all workers, not just the ones you believe might agree or disagree with you on any given issue. To take up the issue rigorously, there would have to be a set of volunteers outside the board itself willing to potentially spend at least a couple months to assess the pros and cons, given how significant a change it would be. The USNC Working Group in 2017 debated many of these issues at meetings that lasted months that occurred roughly every 1.5 weeks and that often went 3 hours. Volunteer time takes investment and commitment.

Like any vote or election, people vote based on their values and their personal interests. I don't think it's odd, for example, that people who run The Dojo would support a larger community space to be built. Just as union members in an election may support one particular candidate who promises to pass laws to support said unions or to increase benefits in union contracts. (Pat has been endorsed by many unions, including labor and construction unions, for example, and I assume those unions then campaigned on her behalf.)

Further regarding the bylaws, there is no specific reason a CBA vote had to be by 2/3. We could have made it 60%, or even a bare majority. My recollection from the Working Group is that 2/3 provides a larger show of community support and may be less polarizing than if it could just pass with a bare majority. 

That all being said, those considerations do nothing to invalidate the CBA vote that was done here per the bylaws that have existed and been publicly known for many years. The City Council received a copy of these bylaws years ago when the USNC first asked for recognition and was approved by the City Council. And the City Councillors who also vote on zoning changes are up for election every two years. I assume that Pat as a resident within Union Square and as an elected State Senator is very familiar with the goings on in her district, so I am curious if she has been keeping apprised of the work of the USNC and discussing it with her constituents. Similarly, it has been known since October 2023 that Somernova wanted to redevelop this site. The USNC started this CBA process over a year ago and had two community summits in March 2024 soliciting feedback from the community about what to ask for in such negotiations.

I am no longer subscribed to Pat's State Senator newsletter since I moved out of the district, but I am curious if she did any outreach about Somernova in the past year and a half, before the past couple of weeks. I only knew about her email against the CBA from it being forwarded to another community listserv that I am a part of.

I am fairly certain the Ward 2 and 3 city councillor newsletters provide updates on the USNC and Somernova on a regular basis, given that City Council is more directly related to these activities. I imagine their newsletters have a relatively large subscription base, at least for those residents who want an easier way to find out what is going on in the city week to week.

Best,

Andy Greenspon

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usnc-public/CAAw12E84074SsbXzgymi8KFMJ9Gq3%2BzhmgK9WiGLbuzN%2BR19BA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kate Lila Wheeler]

Generally I don't think Pat is alleging any misconduct or malfeasance, only that for the future a catchment area may need to be defined that fits the project. I praise USNC for recognizing how the Union Square catchment was not perfectly placed to address the wishes of many people (for example, just across Park Street from the site) and expanded the catchment area, but it was done very close to the vote and there wasn't much outreach.  The USNC original catchment area went all the way to Boynton Yards where there had been lots of construction but it was so far from the site that those of us who were flyering and leafleting felt that residents wouldn't be interested enough. So there were a few ways that the result seemed somewhat weighted away from close neighbors' needs and wishes and requests, meanwhile favoring several strongly organized interest groups.  It's not a slur to ask and try to learn about redefinition of a council before the next huge development, though admittedly as a near abutter whose neighborhood is already glutted with parking and cut-through traffic I am dreading the impact, and feel sympathetic with those who do not look forward to living in the shadows.  Look, we lost, there are multiple remaining problems that were not addressed by the CBA and we are moving on, not bitter, but asking questions that we hope may help Somerville in the future. Hope this helps.  To ask questions is not inherently a hostile act... Kate

--

Kate Lila Wheeler   p: 617-628-3629 m: 617-543-5630  w: katewheeler.com e: lila...@gmail.com  she/hers

[Andy Greenspon]

I understand. I don't have time for a full reply right now but to be brief:

Tone can be lost in writing and not every knows me in person. I am speaking on these issues in a matter of fact way, since a bunch of people asked questions about why and how the process worked and if it can be changed in the future. I have laid out the options and what I believe would be required to enact them and some potential trade offs. I am also happy to talk anyone's ear off about the history of the USNC for those who are curious.

Best,

Andy

[Renee Scott]

Dear USNC neighbors,

It seems to me that there is a simple question on the table: did the USNC board follow the USNC bylaws for the CBA process and subsequent vote? If the answer is yes, then as much as any individual may be upset with the results, the results stand. 

Any member who does not like the bylaws as written could propose a change to them (see Article 15). 

Warmly,

Renée

On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 3:20 PM Kate Lila Wheeler <lila...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usnc-public/CABb8Q1DJ76SqwobXQtHqyGOcbX-9BSA5dXie%3Dt-w6%3D-cLs4zVw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dominique Stassart]

Thank you, Andy for taking the time to share your thoughts. It is so easy to loose sight of the context.

Gratefully,

Dominique