WATERTOWN’S ROUGH SEAS ELECTION OF 2025 NEEDS ALL HANDS ON DECK

 

We are in the midst of an anniversary that no one is celebrating.

It was the Halloween season of 1991.  

On October 28, a cold front moving off the U.S. East Coast begins interacting with a low-pressure system over the Atlantic. At the same time, the remnants of Hurricane Grace are moving northward.

On October 29, the three systems meet off the coast of Nova Scotia, forming a massive “bomb cyclone.” Winds reach hurricane force, and waves exceed 30–40 feet along the New England coast. The still-warm ocean water of the Halloween season provides the storm with high-octane fuel.

October 30 – 31, the storm remains nearly stationary in the North Atlantic, pounding the U.S. East Coast with coastal flooding, erosion, and powerful surf. This is when most of the $200 million of destruction occurs.

November 1 – 2, the storm system moves eastward into the North Atlantic and briefly redevelops into a tropical storm before dissipating, and after taking 13 lives. 

The National Weather Service had predicted a severe nor’easter. They did not predict its intensity.

Later, Bob Case, a senior meteorologist at the National Weather Service office in Boston, dubbed the catastrophic event The Perfect Storm. Author Sebastian Junger made it the title of his best-selling book, and the 2000 movie, starring George Clooney and Mark Wahlberg, guaranteed that The Perfect Storm would become a metaphor for events that occur when conditions merge to become “perfectly” disastrous.

The picture above comes from the movie where a commercial fishing boat, out of Gloucester, the Andrea Gale, is believed to have come apart when it encountered waves that may have been 100 feet high, taking the lives of its six crew members.

 

Watertown’s most recent local election in 2023 was a real snoozer. Of the nine elected officials who most affect our everyday lives, only one member of the City Council, the Council President, had a challenger, and the Vegas odds-makers had made him an overwhelming favorite. Voters could afford to sit that one out. And lots of you did.

 Those were the good old days of the Halloween season of 2023. And they seem so very long ago.

WARNING!!!: Sitting out the election of 2025 could prove to be a costly mistake for you, your family, your friends and neighbors, and for the still somewhat townish City of Watertown.  

From the federal government and state government down to our city manager, we have heard that the economy in 2026 and beyond might be facing “economic headwinds.”

If you’ve been alarmed (or totally freaked out) about the steady rise in your grocery, utilities, and insurance bills, you are already getting smacked in the face by biting, drenching headwinds, and some of you are scared to death that it will get increasingly worse. You have a right to be.

Snoozing through this election is not a sensible option.

Your elected representatives on the City Council can’t lower your bills, but they can make damn sure that your tax dollars – paid directly by homeowners and indirectly by renters − are not squandered on pet projects and policies that do not benefit the greater community.

Of course, it takes a five-to-four vote on the Council to stop those pet projects and policies that do not benefit the greater community.

If a member of your family recently graduated from college or grad school, you probably already know that the job market is crashing and that the jobs they were pursuing may have suddenly vanished.

The job market crash can be chalked up to employers’ uncertainty about the tariffs, combined with the explosiveness of AI. Combined, they are the “perfect” double whammy.

Artificial intelligence is making traditional entry-level corporate jobs expendable. As I write this blog post, Amazon has just announced the elimination of 14,000 corporate jobs. The tech sector as a whole has begun shedding hundreds of thousands of corporate jobs, as those companies shift from expansion to cost-saving restructuring.

The tech sector is not alone. AI is already becoming a career-killer for many young adults who will have to pivot in the midst of an ever-reshaping economic landscape.

To complete this gloomy forecast, we need to add one more system of economic weather that threatens us locally.

The turbo-charged biotech industry that turned Watertown into a modern-day boom town, with a fat corporate tax base, has slowed to a crawl.

So, the property tax dollars that homeowners pay directly and renters pay indirectly have rarely been in more need of protection than they will be in the future, should we find our small community battered by 100-foot economic waves.

And that brings me back to the urgency of having at least a five-vote majority on the Council to increase the odds that projects and policies that benefit the greater community are advanced, while the more utopian projects and policies that do not put the greater community first are not advanced.

The utopians on the Council and in the community are a minority, but they are extremely vocal and extremely well organized, and they continue to win their seats on the Council. In recent years, they have had their share of five-vote wins, but they have been one vote away from running the table, only because you showed up in four consecutive elections.

You showed up and voted for practical, commonsense, community-centered candidates who took time away from their businesses and their families to serve the town in which they grew up.

You did it in 2017 and 2019 when you put Anthony Donato, a complete newcomer to local politics, on the Council with the highest vote total in both elections.

You did it in 2021 when you put John Airasian, a newcomer to elected office, on the Council in a dead heat for second place. And, in 2023, when all at-large incumbents ran unopposed and the community honored him by giving him the highest vote total.

As politicians and Councilors, they were both novices, but they both had deep roots in the community and both possessed a deep understanding of their community and its values.

So, if you voted for Anthony Donato twice and John Airasian twice, feel free to give yourself a round of applause. But please make it quick because Watertown’s future requires your immediate attention.

Tom Tracy is the single most qualified candidate to run for Councilor at-large in at least the last decade. If you are reading this blog, you don’t need me to recite his lengthy resume. And if you know him, you don’t need me to tell you about his commitment to this community or about his deep understanding of this community and its values.

Tom Tracy does not need this job. But this job, at this time and under these circumstances, absolutely needs him. And to make it happen, all we need is for every Anthony Donato voter, every John Airasian voter, every Emily Izzo voter, every Angie Kounelis voter, every Ken Woodland voter, and every other voter who puts the whole community first to show up and cast one single vote in the Councilor at-large category for Tom Tracy.

In other words, All Hands on Deck!

And please wear your life jacket.

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown

JOE GANNO IS ON A CRUSADE

 

After talking to School Committee candidate Joe Ganno, it’s obvious to me that he is on a crusade. Not a medieval kind of crusade. Rather, a crusade to enlighten.

And Joe is not as menacing as the guy in the picture. In fact, he is not menacing at all. He is a modern-day crusader with a big heart, a warm smile, and infectious energy who is busy sounding the alarm on what he calls “the biggest educational challenge of our generation” — the rapid rise of artificial intelligence.

Joe is busy telling anyone who will listen (including me) that the AI revolution is not a future problem that can be dealt with like any other item on a school district’s agenda. AI is already reshaping education, jobs, careers, and society faster than schools can adapt, putting both students and teachers at risk of being left behind.

Here are my takeaways from our conversation:

As a new member of the Watertown School Committee, he will fight for policies that will close the AI literacy gap — ensuring that every child, teacher, and parent understands how AI works, its potential, and its pitfalls.

As voters consider the future of education, he hopes they’ll see that this isn’t simply a tech issue — it’s a children’s issue, a teacher’s issue, and a community issue.

Watertown’s economic future depends on using our taxpayers’ dollars to graduate tech-savvy students who go on to become Watertown’s next generation of community leaders.

 And, he says, “it’s an equity issue. Along with teaching reading and math skills, AI literacy is an irreplaceable skill that prepares every student, regardless of their circumstances, to compete and succeed outside of the classroom.”

It all makes perfect sense to me, but what about a game plan? I asked. Since there is no time to waste, what might the school district do to get the fastest start possible?

“I’m glad you asked,” he said, with a smile. And then, he listed these initial steps.

First, establish clear, community-informed policies on responsible AI use and data privacy. AI will gather huge amounts of personal data on students and teachers that have to be safeguarded.

Second, partner with local universities and tech organizations to bring AI  learning labs and after-school programs to students.

Third, create an AI Ethics and Literacy Curriculum, teaching students to question bias, understand automation, navigate misinformation, and become first-class critical thinkers.

Our kids will inherit a world where algorithms decide what information they will and will not see. Educators need to use every tool at their disposal to make sure our kids understand how those systems work. Their future and Watertown's future will depend on it.

“Okay,” I said.” You’ve got my vote.”

“Wait,” he said, I’m not a one-issue candidate. “Let me tell you about the rest of my platform.”

Some people just won’t take yes for an answer.

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown

 

WATERTOWN’S CRISIS OF MISTRUST AND THE MAN WHO CALLED IT OUT

 

I made a statement in the previous blog post (TURNING A BLIND EYE TO THE CRISIS OF MISTRUST) that the Watertown residents who, to date, have publicly expressed their opinions on the Watertown Square Area Plan are a sliver of the community, and that the majority of those residents are dozens of highly engaged individuals – not hundreds, and certainly not thousands − who have attended multiple meetings and have weighed in multiple times.

I blamed Watertown’s government for leaving this highly consequential decision-making process in the hands of the privileged few and for not doing the hard work required to greatly expand the circle of participants.

To be more specific, I am blaming the City Manager for his intentional or unintentional (I’m not a mind reader) exclusion of the greater Watertown community, and I am blaming some cheerleading members of the City Council for allowing him to get away with it, and even applauding his charade of city-wide inclusion.

I told you that I would make my case based on the evidence available. Will this blog post change the direction or even slow the galloping pace of the Watertown Square Area Plan? Of course not.

But I do believe in history, and at some point in the future, when the process that led to the new Watertown Square (whatever it will look like − good, bad, or ugly) becomes a chapter in our recorded history…well, let me put it this way: history can be one cold S.O.B.

Here is a scenario dreamt up by an incurable optimist, which happens to be me.

This optimist imagines this scenario:

Sometime in the future, in a classroom inside our new high school, a civics teacher will be leading a discussion of the newly rebuilt Watertown Square, where the students (who may not have been born yet) will be studying the process that you and I are currently witnessing.

Our high school students of the future will be trained, we hope, as critical thinkers who will examine the facts of the case objectively and with brutal honesty. My imaginary students are in the fifteen to seventeen-year-old age range, making them too young to be cynical but old enough to be skeptical.

They are intelligent, open-minded, and their B.S. detectors are operative, but are still being fine-tuned.

So, what will those astute young researchers think when they examine the process that took place in their city back in the mid-2020s, that produced the Watertown Square in which they grew up?

Your guess is as good as mine, but I’m going to take a whack at it anyway.

Those student researchers will spend hours upon hours examining the evidence, which will include the recorded public meetings that took place in various locations in the City of Watertown, mostly between 2023 and 2026.

They will see and hear members of the administration and City Council frequently praise the extensive public engagement that guided these leaders in determining their course of action.

I think these future researchers will see for themselves that public engagement was far from extensive and conveniently limited.

First, they will evaluate the so-called “votes” that were cast with sticky notes placed on white boards and on online surveys, and they will ask two obvious questions.

For each” voting” opportunity:

How many of those “voters” voted more than once?

How many of those “voters” may not have been Watertown residents?

And they will ask the most telling question:

What was the total number of unique voters who participated in the voting?

After some discussion, they will conclude that the answer to all three questions is unknowable, because verification was never part of the process.

Then, they will take a look at what has been called the compromise.

The student researchers will learn that to do our part in solving the housing crisis, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts mandated that Watertown rezone certain areas to allow for the construction of at least 1,701 multi-family housing units by-right (without requiring special permits).

But somehow, through all of the City’s presentations, and all of the sticky notes and online surveys, the 1,701 requirement remained locked in a basement at an undisclosed location.

Where did that 1,701 go? At least a few of our super curious kids will be asking that question when they run across two completely different numbers of potential housing units, not mandated by the state. They might have some difficulty in finding the logic stream that led to us having a choice between 6,320 housing units and 2,631 housing units, with 1,701 nowhere to be found.

Whether they find the logic stream or not, they will soon bump into ”the compromise” of 3,133 housing units, and here, their teacher might ask these not-yet cynical students the question:

Does this process pass the smell test?

Then, they just might move on to the three public meetings that speak for themselves and require no verification. They are the three joint meetings of the City Council and Planning Board that took place in 2024, in the Middle School auditorium, on June 13, June 27, and July 16, when after a total of twelve hours of discussion and public input, the two government bodies will vote on whether or not to approve the current stage of the Watertown Square Area Plan.

The students of the future will scrupulously study every minute of the twelve hours consumed by these three meetings. I will stick with a handful of highlights and lowlights, and I will make it quick – except when it comes to one very big highlight.

Several times during the June 13 meeting, while standing at the back of the  Middle School auditorium, viewing a sea of empty seats, I did a head count. Some people wandered in late, others left early. I came up with an average of 150 people in the room. At one point, the Council President announced that about 100 people were watching on Zoom.

The meeting began with the administration’s presentation of the plan. But before they got to the details of the plan, they and their star consultant let us know that public engagement has been off the charts. Nobody involved has ever seen anything like it.

Their message was clear: We should applaud ourselves. And of course, we should applaud them.

If you decide to watch all or part of the recorded meeting:

Public comments begin at 1:17:52 and end at 02:01:02. You will see that the majority of comments fall into a few general categories:

Those who love the plan and the 3,133 units, as it is currently presented.

Those who prefer to see the 6,320 units, but will support the compromise.

Those who would like to see the missing 1,701 units.

Those who believe that housing units recently built or approved should count toward the 1,701.

If you take the time to watch the attendees deliver their comments, I think you would agree that most of the comments, on all sides of the issue, are well thought out and well expressed.

The problem is not the quality of the comments. It’s the number of commenters:

By my count, there were:

43 in-room commenters – several of them speaking more than once,

9 commenters via Zoom,

25 emailed comments read aloud by Councilor Piccirilli,

for a grand total of 77 commenters, which included a few who confessed to being non-residents.

Not all of the comments fit neatly into one of the categories outlined above. Here’s one of those that stood out:

At 01:26:14 into the meeting, a resident came to the podium and said:

“You published the results of a poll of a sort that attracts primarily activists. Would you be willing to commission a polling organization to do a randomized poll of the residents of Watertown?”

Then, he abruptly returned to his seat.

I would like to be sitting in the classroom when my student researchers run across that comment and question, and their teacher asks: What do you think about that? A randomized poll conducted by an independent polling organization, reaching the entire community, and including the option of 1,701 housing units.

The class might also take note of Councilor John Airasian’s question at 1:03:30, when he asks Manager Proakis: Why is the by-right area on the plan so large?

The Manager’s answer is lengthy but boils down to: That’s what the public told us they wanted in the surveys and in the comments on those surveys. Councilor Airasian expresses concern about the City giving up so much control by creating so much by-right zoning.

The June 27 meeting was for members of the Council and Planning Board to make their statements and ask their questions of the administration. The public attended but was not allowed to comment.

Council President Sideris announced that there were about 100 people in the room and a high of 75 on Zoom.

Councilor Airasian comments at 0:53:45.

He again questions the large amount of by-right zoning contained in the plan. He makes it clear that he supports more housing. He also makes it clear that Watertown has been doing its part in creating more housing.

He would like to see a plan designed around the 1,701 units mandated by the state.

His tone could be described as calm and even-tempered.

His comments are followed by Councilor Izzo, who expresses the same basic sentiments through her own personal perspective.

The July 16 meeting will end with a vote by the Planning Board and a vote by the City Council to approve or disapprove the current version of the Watertown Square Area Plan.

Given the importance of this meeting, the room should be packed.

At about 35 minutes into the meeting, the Council President announces that there were 85 people in the room and 73 on Zoom. For the third straight time, I look at a sea of empty seats.

In the room, there are 36 commenters.

On Zoom, there are 12 commenters.

By email, there is 1 commenter.

Total commenters: 49.

Our future researchers will, of course, track the individual commenters at this meeting and the commenters at the June 13 meeting and will accurately determine the overlap − the number of commenters who commented in both meetings. After hours of blurry-eyed viewing and reviewing of the video, I ballparked the overlap at sixty to seventy percent.

No amount of cheerleading on the part of many of our elected and appointed leaders can disguise the fact that community participation in the process was minuscule. The critical thinking, skeptical but not yet cynical student researchers in that civics class in our new high school will see it and hear it for what it was.

Fortunately, they will see and hear one more thing. Some of them might find it hopeful, and some of them might even find it inspirational.

At 2:36:43, Councilor John Airasian delivers a comment. You might see it as more of a speech. You can decide for yourself. The future students of Watertown political history will decide for themselves.

I will give you the words (slightly edited), but the words alone will not do it justice because the words alone will not convey the depth of feeling, which is why you should watch it.

Here, you will not see and hear the calm and even-temperedness of his comments made at the two previous meetings. You might hear what I hear: frustration, exasperation, and possibly a touch of anger.

“I’m not feeling the vote tonight, to be honest with you. We’re missing a Councilor (Emily Izzo). We just heard from DCR that they haven’t had the proper conversations, and several weeks have passed, and I still haven’t seen a plan for 1701.

It’s been mentioned several times tonight. We did get some information here, but I received it later this afternoon, and it was quite a hectic day today. That’s something that I really wanted to see. I’ve asked for it a couple of times, and part of not receiving it…that’s some of the mistrust that some of the people feel, and it’s unfortunate, but decisions of this magnitude have to be scrutinized at the highest level.

This is going to be the biggest change that Watertown will see in decades. Scrutinizing this doesn’t mean that I’m fearful of change. It doesn't mean that at all. It’s actually quite the opposite. I want Watertown Square to change. I just want to make sure that we do it smart and steady.

If we laid this out in a way that we had the 1701and were able to see some of the ramifications that may come down the road, we’d be better equipped to adapt to any issues that we might have, that we may see.

Again, I want to see more housing, affordable units, of course, better connectivity... provide a safer, more enjoyable experience for cyclists and pedestrians, green space, tree canopy, better bus service, and a more vibrant area for our people to enjoy.

Watertown Square was a main topic that I spoke with the Manager about during our first meeting when he got the job.

The scope and the scale of this make it difficult to understand what the outcome will truly be. It’s been mentioned that the size of the buildings is right for the area that we’re focusing on, and that very well might be true, but what happens when you put twenty-five of them there? This is why I truly believe that we have to roll it out tactfully.

I wanted to see where the MBTA was delineated…our part of the MBTA zoning. How can the public feel confident getting behind this plan without all of the information in front of them?

And the only deadline that we have is the MBTA zoning, which is why we should start there. And I want to be clear that I’m not against the units proposed, but I want to stress the importance of doing it in a way that allows us to shift if we need to before it’s too late.

What happens if the traffic gets worse or MBTA service continues to be terrible? Or our residential streets become cut-throughs, or worse still, the response time for public safety suffers? We’ll have no recourse, and as this plan (for 1701) evolves in the MBTA zoning, we’ll have actual data, and it will be much quicker for us to adapt. Thank you.”

 

I wondered whether to call this a comment or a speech. After watching Councilor Airasian deliver it, over and over again, I see it as something else. Through all of his disappointment and frustration, he attempted to do the impossible. He attempted to speak on behalf of the tens of thousands of Watertown residents who were not in the room, not on Zoom, and not in the information loop, which includes the many residents who are digitally disconnected.

He attempted to speak for those who decided that you can’t fight City Hall, because City Hall will do whatever is good for them and couldn’t care less about what’s good for you.

He attempted to speak for those Watertown residents whose lives are consumed with raising families, caring for elders, coping with the escalating cost of living, and/or dealing with challenges that are none of our business. 

He succeeded in calling out the mistrust in government, and in doing so, triggered a defensive response from other Councilors who proceeded to tell us that they have no idea what he is talking about. Mistrust? What mistrust? The process has been inclusive and robust. My constituents tell me they love the process.

To me, it was more of a plea than a speech. An impassioned plea to stop and consider the community – the whole community. It was a plea from an elected member of government, who comes from the whole community, lives in the whole community, and whose understanding of the whole community is embedded in his DNA.

Will his plea go unrecognized, unacknowledged, and unappreciated? Maybe. Or just maybe, it will be unearthed and studied by future students, young and old, who, upon examining the crisis of mistrust of government, and seeing and hearing Councilor Airasian courageously call out that mistrust, will be inspired to make things better.

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown

TURNING A BLIND EYE TO OUR CRISIS OF MISTRUST

 

There are approximately 25,000 registered voters in the still somewhat townish City of Watertown.

In the last meaningful city election, in 2021, when seats for the City Council were contested (unlike the election of 2023), approximately 6,000 of those 25,000 registered voters saw fit to cast a vote.

Growing up in ancient times, members of my generation were taught that voting was a civic duty for all citizens and that exercising that sacred duty should not be taken lightly.

When one of my sixth-grade classmates asked why voting should be considered sacred, our teacher’s answer was blunt and uncharacteristically emotional. She said: If it were not for the sacrifices of our parents and grandparents, we would all be speaking German.

What did that have to do with voting? some of us wondered. She left it to us to connect the dots.

 Over the years, voting has gotten easier and easier. In Watertown, we can vote early, vote by mail, or vote in person on election day, any time we want, from 7 am to 8 pm.

Yet in this coming election on November 4, we can reasonably expect that about 19,000 − 76 percent! − of our friends and neighbors will make a conscious decision not to participate.

Watertown is not an outlier. Our low participation rate is about par for the course across the country. Voter participation, especially in local elections, has been declining for decades. If I were king, Saving Private Ryan would be mandatory viewing in every public school in the country, and if my sixth-grade teacher were still alive, she would thank me.

 And I would thank her.

The question is: why is this basic level of participation in our democracy so pathetically low?

Surveys confirm what you already know. One big reason is that non-voters are often quietly cynical. Simply put, they doubt that their vote would make a difference. When you challenge a non-voting friend or acquaintance, they just might hit you with the age-old adage: You can’t fight city hall!

Why can’t you fight city hall? Because: They do whatever is good for them and couldn’t care less about what’s good for us.

Is that just an excuse to be lazy and happily uninvolved? Probably, for some. But for many, mistrust of government is the result of their own experiences, when government turned a blind eye to their problems and grievances or got involved and made things worse.

The way I see it, our local leaders – elected and appointed – have a choice. They can take the easy road and say to the non-voting majority of our community:

The hell with you! We and the voting minority that put us in charge will make our decisions without you.

Or they could take the hard road and get to know our fellow residents one door-knock at a time. Would they encounter a lot of simmering cynicism? Of course they would.

But might those city “outreachers” also gain a valuable understanding of the mistrust that makes the vast majority of Watertown’s registered voters sit on the sidelines?

And, as a result, might our elected and appointed leaders discover for themselves that lost trust can actually be regained − not always, but sometimes − with a well-strategized good-faith effort?

 I will bet you that someone in your orbit had this experience. While out running errands, they parked their car on Main Street or in the parking lot behind CVS or the library, or stepped off a bus, or strolled from their home to the conveniently located main post office with their mail and/or package in hand, only to be stunned that it was no longer there.

Who do you think those individuals blamed for the loss of a convenience they had always depended on and never imagined would be taken away? It’s a safe bet that they cynically blamed City Hall – the institution, they believe, that will usually do what it wants to do with little regard for the lives being lived by the average person.

Mistrust of government is certainly not limited to Watertown, but just because it might go unrecognized and unaddressed in many other cities and towns does not mean that it should go unrecognized and unaddressed here, within these walkable four square miles.

Why is there not an official recognition of the consistently poor election turnout that decides who the nine citizens are that will represent all of us on our legislative body?

Why can’t we aim to flip the script and resolve to produce majority election turnouts instead of lopsided election ‘sitouts’? Let’s imagine that a future edition of Watertown’s government decides to flip that script. How would they go about it? Not by making voting easier. That’s already been done.

First, our elected leaders would have to do what they are naturally disinclined to do. They would have to face up to the cynicism and mistrust of the very institution they represent.

Then, they would have to find a way to address that cynicism and mistrust.

You already know what I’m going to say. There is nothing more powerful than going to a person’s home, ringing their doorbell, introducing yourself, and saying: We (your government) would like to know what YOU think – especially when the person making that statement really does want to know what YOU think.

In a battle to end cynicism, sincerity could turn out to be surprisingly disarming.

If you happen to agree that non-participation in our city elections demands attention, then you just might feel the same way about the level of non-participation in the single most consequential decision-making process of our time.

Welcome to the project known as The Watertown Square Area Plan – a project that will change Watertown beyond the imagination of the average Watertown resident, who currently knows little or nothing about what it entails and where it could lead.

For those Watertown residents whose lives are consumed with raising families, caring for elders, coping with the escalating cost of living, or dealing with challenges that are none of our business, and may be digitally unconnected, the sudden loss of the main post office was just a bitter appetizer; a misguided transformation of Watertown Square might be the undigestible main course.

How many members of the community are relatively clueless about the plan? I can’t give you a number because City Hall has made no effort to find out.

What should be an easier question to ask is how many members of the community have cast a vote or expressed their opinion in any public forum on any aspect of the plan?

Well, there’s no real non-fuzzy data on that either, but this is fertile ground for an amateur detective, which in this case, is me.

Did you guess somewhere around 6,000, the measly 24 percent of the community that will likely vote in this November’s election? If you did, you were way off.

If you add up all the events, which include “ Kitchen Table Conversations,” charettes, placing sticky notes on white boards, online surveys, and meetings that took place at several different venues, and you add up all of the participants, I think you would find that there have been several hundred participants, not several thousand.

 But to get the real participation story, we need to try to boil it down to the nitty-gritty − how many unique individuals contributed to the administration’s understanding of what they refer to as “the majority of public opinion” of the plan.

The reality is that we can’t know how many unique individuals weighed in on the Watertown Square Area Plan, because City Hall doesn’t know how many unique individuals weighed in. And I’m not sure they want to know.

If you go back and watch recordings of the meetings, you just might conclude, as I have, that hundreds of opinions were presented by dozens of highly motivated and opinionated contributors, including a loud and rehearsed contingent of housing activists, all adding up to a sliver of the greater community.

Do I have it right, or am I way off base? I don’t think that many of you will study the hours upon hours of recorded meetings, as I have, to decide for yourselves, so I will make my case, as best I can, working through the pile of fuzzy data, in my next blog post, which will be titled:

 Watertown’s Crisis of Mistrust and the Man Who Called It Out.

And, no, that man was not me.

To be continued…

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown

THIS IS AN EMERGENCY!

JOHN AIRASIAN WILL NOT BE SEEKING REELECTION TO THE WATERTOWN CITY COUNCIL IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

 

FOR HIS SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY OF WATERTOWN, WE OWE COUNCILOR AIRASIAN OUR HEART-FELT GRATITUDE. (MORE ON THIS, LATER)

 

THE BALANCE ON THE COUNCIL IS NOW UP FOR GRABS.

 

THE FACT  THAT YOU READ THIS BLOG MEANS THAT YOU LIKELY PREFER NUTS AND BOLTS PRAGMATISM OVER IDEALISTIC PROGRESSIVISM.

 

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU PROBABLY VOTED FOR JOHN AIRASIAN AND HIS COMMON SENSE, COMMUNITY-FOCUSED APPROACH TO HIS POSITION OF COUNCILOR AT LARGE.

 

HERE’S THE GOOD NEWS:

 

AT THE REQUEST OF SOME VERY CONCERNED CITIZENS, TOM TRACY HAS STEPPED UP TO RUN FOR COUNCILOR AT LARGE.

 

NOBODY HAS DEEPER ROOTS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

NOBODY HAS CONTRIBUTED MORE TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THIS CITY.

 

BUT…

HERE’S THE CHALLENGE.

HIS NOMINATION PAPERS NEED TO BE SIGNED BY 100 OF US AND RETURNED TO THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE BY MONDAY, JULY 14!

 

THIS IS COMPLETELY DOABLE!

 

TOM’S NOMINATION PAPERS WILL BE ON MY FRONT PORCH AT 67 MARION ROAD BY THE TIME YOU READ THIS BLOG POST.

PLEASE SIGN HIS PAPERS AND GET SOMEONE ELSE TO SIGN THEM TOO. ELODIA AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU.

 

Bruce Coltin, The Friggin Battle For Watertown 

THE LAB RATS ARE US

 

If you’ve been calmly or uncalmly ignoring the economic alarm bells that now ring on what seems like a daily basis, this might be a good time for you to sit up and take notice.

If you thought the president’s warning that “there will be short-term pain” wasn’t meant for you, Walmart’s announcement that, due to the tariffs, they will be forced to raise their prices should serve as a much-needed reality check – even if you’ve never set foot in a Walmart.

Walmart’s claim to fame is price stability. The world’s largest retailer famously leans on its suppliers to accommodate its promise of “Everyday Low Prices” – a phrase that will soon take on a different meaning.

The president is now leaning on Walmart to eat those price increases. (Do you remember free-market, pro-business conservatism?) So far Walmart has shown no interest in complying with his demand.

So, how high will Walmart’s low prices go if they don’t cave to the president?  How could Walmart possibly know in today’s climate of certain uncertainty caused by on-again, off-again, up-again, down-again tariffs?

How will their customers respond to higher prices than they are used to − higher prices than many of them can afford?

We will soon find out. Think of it as an accidental experiment.

Whether they like it or not, the world’s largest retailer, with over 100 million weekly shoppers across the U.S. is now a giant economic laboratory with 100 million budget-conscious lab rats and a lot of economy-watchers peering through their windows.

For consumers, small business owners, and municipal governments (you know, like the one that governs the still somewhat townish city of Watertown), Walmart’s price hikes and how its customers respond might be exactly the kind of economic indicator that makes more and more people ask:

How much pain will there be?

And how long will it last?

Speaking of economic indicators…

Those of you who rely mostly on the stock market to predict the near-term economy may have reached the point when you’re ready to tune out the noisy rollercoaster and tune in to more reliable predictors.

And, since I have only the vaguest notion of what they would be, I asked ChatGBT to give me a list of all the economic indicators that experts use to take the temperature of the U.S. economy.

I expected my AI friend to give me 12 to 15, which would be a reasonable number for me to list in this blog post. Unfortunately, my AI friend handed me an unwieldy list of 90 (Walmart not included). You can see the list here.

What exactly was I supposed to do with 90 economic indicators? Sure, they would make me better prepared to follow the short or long-term wreckage resulting from the chaotic tariff uncertainties and might make me the center of attention at a future cocktail party, if I could figure out how to make sense of the mountain of information.

I thought about dropping the 90 indicators into a spreadsheet, so I could monitor each of them weekly monthly, or quarterly, depending on their update schedules.

I thought about it. But not for long.

Like many of you, I simply want to know:

Are we on the road to recession?

Or stagflation?

Or will we soon discover that we are already there?

Or does it even matter what the experts call it if we can feel it?

My somewhat reliable gut instinct tells me that for millions of Americans and thousands of Watertown residents, it’s all about the “Can’t Factor.”

The trip they can’t take, the car they can’t buy, the business they can’t start or maintain, the house they can’t buy, the apartment they can’t rent, the night out they can no longer afford, and the small indulgences that made life a little easier or more pleasant that they can’t continue to enjoy.

I wondered: Could there be a simple economic indicator that the average person, like me, can examine and follow that will give us a reading on the economic pain that many people are already experiencing? One that we don’t need a degree in economics to understand.

Something like the Walmart factor.

While the nearest Walmarts are about 10 miles away, it turns out that there’s another economic laboratory within walking distance from my house, where we can peer through the windows and observe the part of the economy.

It’s located at 197 California Street. Chances are you’ve been there.

It’s called McDonalds. 

This May 1, 2025 headline did not get nearly the attention it deserved:

IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2025, MCDONALD'S REPORTED A 3.6% DECLINE IN U.S. SALES—THE STEEPEST DROP SINCE 2020

This headline speaks volumes. And so do the details that go with it.

CEO Chris Kempczinski attributed this downturn to broader economic uncertainty (there’s that word again) and inflation (there’s that other word again), noting that even middle-income Americans are feeling the squeeze.

CFO Ian Borden highlighted that middle-income traffic dropped nearly double digits year-over-year, indicating that economic pressures are expanding beyond low-income households.

How does McDonald’s define low-income and middle-income?

McDonald’s doesn’t publicly publish those definitions, but based on marketing research practices and industry standards, their definitions typically align with national income brackets. Here's a general breakdown based on U.S. Census Bureau and Pew Research Center benchmarks:

Income Tier Annual Household Income

Low Income            Less than $50,000

Middle Income      $50,000 to $149,999

High Income           $150,000 and above

As an amateur economy watcher, It would be valuable to know if a growing number of customers with a household income of $100,000 to $150,000 have cut back on their Big Macs and fries due to the economy.

The headline also serves as an important reminder that the COVID-19 Recession was only five years ago and that we have absolutely no idea how many Americans nationally and locally, who lost their jobs, careers, businesses, and maybe their health, are still treading water.

 

For individuals, already struggling to stay afloat, an economy that delivers even short-term pain is about as tolerable as a sudden riptide.

In the category of small indulgences that make life a little easier or a little more pleasant, being able to spontaneously pull into a  McDonald’s drive-thru, without worrying about the cost of the meal might be high on the list of a lot of local lab rats.

But today, low and medium-income customers have to contend with the ever-rising costs of water and sewer rates, energy bills, property taxes, rent, insurance, food, clothing, and other necessities, all adding up to a skyrocketing cost of living, turning those small indulgences into unjustifiable luxuries.

In 2015, the average cost of a Big Mac Meal (which includes a medium-sized drink and medium fries) in the Watertown area was $5.99. In 2020, the price remained unchanged. By 2025 the average price of a Big Mac Meal reached $12.09. 

McDonald's knew that to win back their customers, they would need a rescue plan, designed for a tough economy that will likely get a lot tougher before it gets better.

They knew It would have to be value-driven. The plan is now in place. And so is the experiment. Whether it succeeds or fails will tell us a lot about where we are headed.

I will of course be checking their updates. In the meantime, whenever I find myself driving down California Street, usually around lunchtime, I make it a point to pull into the McDonald’s parking lot and count the number of cars in line at the drive-thru and the cars in parking spaces.

It’s obvious to me that business, compared to even a few months ago, is way off. (Try it yourself. We can compare notes)

Like the McDonald’s mucky mucks told us: People are feeling the squeeze. Locally, this is an election year. If I were a candidate for City Council, I would take that line and run with it.

And run with it. And run with it. And run with it.

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown 

IS WATERTOWN WHISTLING PAST AN ECONOMIC GRAVEYARD?

 

When you think back to the days of the pandemic, what comes to mind first? For many, it would of course be the staggering death toll (over 1 million in the U.S. alone), especially if someone you know died from the disease. For others, it might be the vaccines, the school closings, or the isolation.

Or, it might be the recession.

If you were a worker between the ages of 18 and 24, the recession that most affected your life was the COVID-19 Recession of 2020. Members of that age group, especially those who worked in hospitality, retail, or food service were most likely to lose their jobs. Young workers in other sectors were likely to have their careers placed on hold.

I have lived through seven recessions in my adult life. To some extent, I remember all of them. But it was the recession that took place from December 2007 to June 2009 − aptly dubbed the Great Recession − that I remember most vividly.

On the eve of that recession, the 2007 U.S. unemployment rate was 4.4%. At the peak of that recession, in October 2009, it had skyrocketed to 10%, and over 8.7 million U.S. jobs, including mine, had vanished. With massive government intervention, the unemployment rate gradually declined to 5% in 2015. The employment disruption lasted eight long years.

The Great Recession began when the housing market collapsed and the construction sector lost over 2.3 million jobs. It took 10 years for that sector to return to pre-recession employment levels.

The housing stories featured in the news were not about building more units and creating density, they were about loan defaults and foreclosures. There were reports from across the country of homeowners so upside-down on their mortgages they walked out their front doors and never looked back.

At its low point, the Dow lost 50% of its value. Prominent psychologists advised the public not to look at their 401ks. For therapists and other mental health professionals, business was booming.

Bankruptcies and layoffs were the dominant business news stories. More than 30,000 businesses filed for Chapter 11. Had it not been for a federal bailout, General Motors and Chrysler would have ceased to exist.

Looking back at the Great Recession and the COVID-19 Recession, we can see the number of jobs that were lost, but we can’t see the number of careers that ended prematurely with those jobs. We can see the number of business bankruptcies, but we can’t see the number of middle-class families that descended into poverty.

Statistics take us only so far. The human damage from any recession can never be adequately quantified. The number of Americans who never recovered is incalculable and remains an untold story.

With all of my vivid memories of the Great Recession, there was a highly relevant fact that I could not immediately recall.

Who was the President of the United States?

It happened under the watch of George W. Bush, but it never became known as the Bush Recession. The causes were too numerous and complex to assign total blame to that president. And, we could say the same of every other past recession of my adult life. The causes were too numerous and complex to assign total blame to any of those presidents.

Fast forward to March 2025.

The President of the United States has declared a trade war on our neighbors and our allies. His weapon of choice: tariffs.

Here’s a summary of Trump’s war so far: He tariffs them. They respond by threatening to tariff us. He responds by tariffing them more. He delays, he threatens, he exempts, he reinstates. He doubles down. Intentional or unintentional, it is economic chaos and the markets and investors don’t like it. And neither do employers. And neither do consumers.

Once again, it might be advisable not to check your 401k. Once again, mental health professionals should consider canceling their vacations.

President Trump, who presided over the COVID-19 Recession, explained that a future recession might be a necessary part of a “transition” to a much stronger U.S. economy.

He is fine with having his weapon of choice referred to as the Trump Tariffs, in fact, he practically insists on it. Why share the credit?

For the first time in our lives, a President of the United States considers a recession an acceptable component of his economic policies. But has he really thought it through?

Is he too comfortable with the prospect of a recession?

There are tens of millions of voters who believe that Donald Trump is a genius − a master strategist who is playing chess while his opponents are playing checkers. They believe the United States has foolishly allowed other nations to take unfair advantage of our generosity, making them richer and us poorer.

There are tens of millions of voters who believe that Donald Trump is a malicious sociopath who has become America’s mad king. They believe that we and the rest of the free world have become helpless passengers in a vehicle being driven erratically by a drunk driver.

The question as to whether he is a chess master or a mad king should start becoming clearer as the trade war continues to develop.

(Sorry for my blatant metaphor-mixing. I try my best to keep it in check, but…)

Most economists agree that if the tariff war continues, there will be pain. The question is: How much and for how long? The answer is anyone’s guess. No economic guru has a crystal ball.

One possible outcome of the tariff war is stagflation − an economy suffering simultaneously from recession and inflation.

My immediate question is: What should Watertown do to prepare for the economic fallout?

Municipalities were hard hit during the Great Recession. Several filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 9. Others were forced to cut services and slash their payrolls.

Watertown was well-positioned under the stewardship of Town/City Manager Mike Driscoll and we emerged from the recession intact. That was so yesterday.

How vulnerable is today’s Watertown to a sharp economic downturn? The life-science boom that had been filling the city’s coffers is now barely a whimper. Developers have been cautiously playing wait-and-see while an already uncertain market decides to declare itself.

With tariffs, they will soon face higher costs of lumber, steel, and other building materials that were already high and already getting higher.

Meanwhile, residents have had to contend with the ever-rising costs of living: water and sewer rates, energy bills, property taxes, insurance, and the current cost of food, clothing, and other necessities.

Has Watertown’s economy become more fragile than most of us realized, making us less able to handle the load that tariffs will pile on the shoulders of struggling residents?

Our city government seems to be in a business-as-usual mode, taking for granted that the storm clouds will pass, sparing us the pain that other municipalities will suffer if the tariff war continues.

Maybe Watertown will be spared. Maybe.

But, maybe it’s time to hit the pause button and focus on emergency preparedness.

Maybe it’s time to turn our rainy day fund into a tsunami fund.

Maybe it’s time to tighten our belts and halt our government’s hiring spree.

Maybe it’s time for some tough, honest conversations.

 

Bruce Coltin, The Battle For Watertown