Norwood News

I experienced several firsts today: It was my first time speaking directly to an elected official (rather than e-mailing, sending a letter, or speaking with an assistant) about an issue of concern to me; it was my first time being yelled at by an elected official; it was my first time telling an elected official to stop yelling at me.

This morning I called Councilman Oliver Koppell’s office to express my desire to see a provision for living-wage jobs in the Community Benefit Agreement being negotiated for the Kingsbridge Armory development. A woman answered the phone and I stated that I was a Norwood resident and would like to speak to Koppell or his deputy chief of staff. She asked me what I wished to speak with him about, and when I told her, she asked me if I was a resident or an advocate. While I replied “resident,” I wondered to myself, what sort of question is that? Aren’t we all advocates when we call our councilperson? Isn’t that what advocacy is – pressing our representatives in government to represent our interests as constituents? Anyway, she took down my name and number and said she would have him call me back.

About 10 minutes later the phone rang and Councilman Koppell was on the other end, explaining that he only had a few minutes, but that we could talk about the issue briefly. I was very impressed to receive a call from Koppell himself within 10 minutes of leaving a message, and I think he should certainly be commended for this.

I explained my concern – that I thought it was really important that provisions be included in the Armory CBA that would require retailers to pay a living wage. He assured me he was doing his best in the negotiations about the CBA and that there were many other provisions they were trying to negotiate. He then shared with me the challenge they are experiencing with the failed development of a small shopping center on 230th near Broadway, which is currently a parking lot. He asked if I knew of it, and when I replied I did not, he recounted for me the proceedings with the developer who was originally going to pay $12 million for the space, but, since the economic decline, now wants the city to hand over the property for nothing. He continued to refer to this as illustrative of what might happen with the Armory.

I replied that I felt the Armory was a project of an entirely different scale, and that I did not feel that the development of the Armory was in jeopardy based on certain provisions being requested in the Community Benefit Agreement.  It is too big and valuable. He disagreed and then proceeded to tell me that he doubted any of my acquaintances were the ones who were out of a job, and instructed me to go talk to a person without a job and ask them whether they wanted to get a minimum wage job or no job at all. While I wonder how Koppell knows anything about my acquaintances, I let the issue slide.  I simply repeated again that I didn’t feel like the negotiations were at the point where the issue of a living wage would jeopardize the entire redevelopment of the Armory.

At that point Councilman Koppell began to speak in a rather raised voice saying “You’re not listening to me.” As I tried to reply he continued to repeat, with increasing levels of volume, his points about the failure of the development on 230th and that I was not listening to his reasoning. I assured him that I understood that there are many things he needs to take into consideration, and that I am not an economist or a policymaker, but I am a constituent. And as a politician his job is to listen to his constituents. He continued.

Finally I interrupted him saying something to the effect of, “Councilman Koppell, I don’t pretend to understand all the aspects of this issue. But I am your constituent and I am expressing that my concern is that there be a living wage provision included in the Armory redevelopment.  Your job is to say ‘Thank you for expressing your concern. I have heard you and I will take it into consideration with all the other things we need to be concerned about in these negotiations.’”  I then made it very clear that I did not appreciate how unprofessional he was being and that he should not be yelling at one of his constituents.

I never imagined when I woke up this morning that I would have so many firsts. Oh, I have another one to add to the list: It was my first time counseling an elected representative how to do (or not do) his job.

Michelle Born
Norwood