House or Business Afire? Call Sperber.
By Jim Conley • Mar 23rd, 2007 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
Word is that last night’s Advisory Committee (the people who put the rubber in rubber stamp) was overrun by the economic development lackeys who were there to warn against cutting the Commercial Coordinators position from the municipal budget. Robert Sperber, the chair of the Town’s Economic Development Advisory Board, led the torch parade on behalf of this $67 thousand (plus benefits) per year employee.
(Incidentally, Tuesday’s selectman’s meeting on the same subject featured a bizarre analysis of the problems facing local retailers by Selectman Nancy Daly. She attributes all of the woe to merchants to the rents charged by landlords. Apparently, Daly has never heard of a triple net lease and appears unaware that the tax increases the town imposes are paid by the lessee not the lessor).
Let’s see, the commercial coordinators job is to serve as liaison between town government and local merchants. You know, to improve relations. Last I checked, though, merchants were leaving in droves and those who are staying are bitter over significant lease expenses due to tax escalation. I’m willing to bet they’d happily see the commercial coordinator position eliminated if it meant stemming the increase in taxes paid to the Town of Brookline.
So Sperber will have us cut three fire firefighters, two policemen and $2 million out of the school budget to make this position (plus the $86 thousand economic development officer) untouchable? As the Guiness men say, “Brilliant!”
Also, what was Sperber getting at when he rattled on about a lawyer/resident standing in the way of economic development in the area around BU? Isn’t there more to economic development in Brookline than a Roger Cassin/Winn Development project? Guess not.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
Was Sperber talking about me? What economic development in the area around BU presumably in Brookline? There is very little that BU doesn’t own on the Brookline side of Comm. Ave. Some is commercial, some is educational. BU has proposed no commercial developments in recent years on its portion of Comm. Ave. in Brookline. (Perhaps Sperber, although retired now after straightening out the Chelsea schools for BU at considerable expense, following his laamented segue from Brookline’s schools, knows more about BU’s plans in the area than I do.) I do know that BU has long coveted the MA Turnpike Extension air rights parcels in Brookline (as well as several in Boston) for development. I also am aware of the recent Cassin/Winn proposal for developing these air rights presented to EDAB, at which its representative reported that BU had no such interest. This was promptly contradicted by a BU representative to me. Perhaps this accounts for yesterday’s Globe and Herald reports on BU’s proposed “Ellipse.” I don’t know if Cassin/Winn is still pushing for these air rights, whether with or without the support of Sperber and EDAB. Perhaps BU and Cassin/Winn are considering some joint development of the air rights. Now that would be a dynamic duo (or trio). BU has in the past looked at these air rights as accommodating its educational mission as it does not wish to expand its campus longitudinely. So what economic development is Sperber talking about that I may standing in the way of. BU’s proposed “Ellipse” is in the dream or idea stage. If the “Ellipse” is not eclipsed, the development would be long range, as quite a bit of money is needed to develop air rights. (Cassin/Winn may be having difficulty financing their humongous air rights project eastward in Boston know as Columbus Circle or Square.) And BU has certain priorities on the old Comm. Armory site. Then there may be BU projects in the center of its traditional campus what with Burger King gone. There were plans for a new law school building that may be revived. BU has a lot on its plate.
All of that development by BU will impact traffic; but development of the air rights would create even more problems. Would these air rights sites be serviced from Comm. Ave., Essex/Mountfort Sts., Carlton St. Bridge and/or St. Mary’s St. Bridge during construction, after construction is completed? How might that impact traffic in the area? And might it conflict with the Urban Ring Phase 2? If the air rights parcels development were to include commercial operations, would they service primarily the BU community, or the adjoining Cottage Farm Neighborhood, or perhaps a significant region similar, say, to Coolidge Corner? What about traffic and parking issues? Keep in mind that on-site parking could not be placed underground, thus requiring more above ground (actually above the deck to be built) development to accommodate parking needs.
Meantime, Harvard in developing the Allston properties it institutionally blockbusted wants to be able to be connected up with public transportation to both its Cambridge campus and to the Longwood Medical Area. MIT is also in the mix. And the ever expanding Longwood Medical Area as well. These institutions are in fact driving the Urban Ring Phase 2 without significant citizen participation from the residential neighborhoods that would be impacted. Add to this the proposed for profit developments of air rights near Fenway Park.
Now, Cambridge neighborhoods will not idlely sit by as they would be impacted. The same with the Fenway. Yes, public transit must be improved. But where will the money come from as federal funding is quite limited? After alll, the BIG DIG was a bit much, wasn’t it?
All of this is long range in any event. I wonder if Sperber and EDAB have thought this out in their efforts to come up with tax revenues for Brookline in a relatively short period of time because of Brookline’s budget restraints? I wish he would identify with some specificity any economic development I am standing in the way of. Many, many years ago when Sperber was chairing the predecessor of EDAB, his committee came up with upzoning along Commonwealth Avenue that would rake in significant property tax revenues. But then it was pointed out that BU would most likely take advantage of such upzoning, perhaps on a tax exempt basis. The committee soon thereafter went into hibernation and then came roaring out in the form of EDAB. But what has it accomplished? I have suggested a cost/benefit review of EDAB, especially in light of Brookline’s budgetary problems. Alas, as noted in the post, Sperber and EDAB seem more interested in their survival as the schools are on fire with the budgeting.
I should point out to those who might not know, Sperber is fixated on the Fuller Building which BU had owned and tried to have developed as a hotel. Our trusty ZBA accommodated the hotel project; but the decision was appealed and at the trial, major witnesses for the plaintiffs (I was but one of many of my neighbors) challenging the decision were experts from Boston’s Transportation Department. The matter was sent back to the ZBA for further consideration but the hotel developer decided not to go ahead further. By the way, yesterday’s Globe and Herald articles on BU’s proposed “Ellipse” indicate that some or all of the Fuller Building may have to go for such project. That was the wrong place for what was supposed to be a first class hotel for many reasons. I said so back at the time, suggesting Kenmore Square as a more appropriate location. Lo and behold, many years later, the Commonwealth Hotel was built (partly owned by BU), well accommodating Kenmore Square, at the other end of BU’s campus. BU, you’re welcome.
I would hope that Sperber might in his retirement find the time to respond with meaningful discourse instead of just rattling on about ….
When are the citizens going to get angry?
The town government is shutting down a fire station and cutting $2 million from the school budget, forcing program cuts and requiring 50% increases in some class sizes.
All the while Brookline town government is proceeding with an unnecessary $18 million renovation of town hall, featuring an improved employee lounge.
There should be picketing in front of town hall and a petition to recall the selectmen and fire the town manager.
I used to think the term “chump” only described how town officials viewed Brookline’s citizens. But, unless the citizenry does something about the abuse being perpetrated on them right now, I would have to conclude the term fits.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK A REDUCTION IN THE COMMERCIAL TAX RATE WILL REJUVINGATE ‘SHABBY CORNER’ STAND IN THE CORNER! I did sense this from a recent presentation Dr. Sperber made to the Selectmen assembled.
I don’t think it’s the TAX RATE . . . THE RENT that the RIT’s charge be the culprit me sweet! If ONE more BANK moves into SHABBY CORNER’s I shall bring up lunch! A rate reduction will only permit the RIT’s to keep stores vacant longer! Oh, and by the way the Assessor has CREATED additional COMMERCIAL INCOME! He has reclassified many B&B’s Commercial and CUT THEIR TAX BILL which had been based on INCOME! Just to get the few who rented LONG TERM and didn’t charge the $99 per night PP/docc! Oh the TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE when first we practice . . . YES! 6 out of 10 residents of BROOKLINE did not live here 15 years ago! Just how many knitting town meeting members do we have? Brookline, Lodging House owner, a “Townie” baptized at St. Aidan Church . . .
Mr. Mazmanian,
Archie, moocho grazzi for manning the North Eastern bulwarks! Good thing Shakespeare didn’t have a zealous following! Crazy we aren’t harvesting all the $25 dollar tickets along Longwood Ave. from the over 2 hr. Parkers! Guess our town fathers don’t consider THAT REVENUE? or else THEY fear that it might provide a cushion to keep the Fire Station open and discourage a proposition 2.5 chances for success?! Chris Pauli