OP-ED: The Lavender Bamboo Ceiling — LGBT+ x AAPI Perspectives on the Workplace

Jason Ng

By Jason Ng (he/him)Director of PRIDE, NAAAP Boston & Civil Engineer, Sasaki Associates

I’ll admit, it sounds weirdly specific to say I lead a group dedicated to LGBT+ Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) professionals. But on the heels of AAPI Heritage Month, in the thick of the growing #stopasianhate movement, and marching through Pride Month, this is our moment and we have a unique story to share. 

I write this piece to show you what I’ve gathered as common themes that affect LGBT+ AAPI individuals in the workplace. These stem from conversations with various folks I’ve met through my life and career, from personal experiences, and from my own NAAAP PRIDE team and community. However, I should clarify that this list cannot possibly encompass the vast diversity of LGBT+ AAPI experiences. I speak mostly from my perspective as a cisgender, gay, mixed Chinese- and Vietnamese-American man in the built environment industry, and it would be irresponsible to ignore the specific privileges and limitations of my worldview. 

Let’s dig into how these three aspects of identity overlap.

OP-ED: The Truth About the Proposed Noise Ordinance

The Truth about the Noise Ordinance

I read Councilor Woodland’s Op-Ed of March 18th on the proposed Noise Ordinance with dismay. It was filled with misleading claims and fear mongering tactics. I feel it is necessary to clear up some misconceptions. 

In order to make his points Councilor Woodland left out key elements of the ordinance which alter the meaning of several quotes that he chose to share. For instance, he asserts that the “proposed ordinance caps permissible noise from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. in residential areas (more than 10 minutes long) between 55-60 dbA (depending on duration)” and since conversation is 60 dbA it would outlaw talking. However he neglects to mention that the dbA at the source is not relevant.

OP-ED: Proposed Noise Ordinance Effectively Bans Lawn Mowers, Leaf Blowers

The Proposed Noise Ordinance Effectively Bans All Residential and Commercial Leaf Blowers/Lawn Mowers & Will Have Significant Other Negative Effects on Watertown Residents

On September 12, 2017 (yes 2017), the Town Council was asked to consider an issue brought up by the then Health Director regarding the Town’s noise ordinance. The reason? A resident, who lives next to the Commander’s mansion, claimed the landscaper who cuts the grass around the mansion was violating Watertown’s noise ordinance by cutting the grass too early in the morning. The Health Department disagreed. They reasoned that the noise ordinance, in its current form, exempts domestic lawnmowers and although the ordinance did not explicitly mention exempting commercial lawnmowers like the ones used outside the mansion, such a strict interpretation would likely place all commercial landscaping equipment in violation of the ordinance and result in a complete ban of such activity (whichclearly was not the intent of the ordinance).

OP-ED: State Sen. Brownsberger on Proposed Police Reform in Mass.

State Sen. Will Brownsberger

(The following piece was provided by State Sen. Will Brownsberger, whose district includes Watertown, Belmont and parts of Boston)

Shortly, the Governor will decide whether to approve a major policing reform package. 

The legislature sent him the bill after hours of emotional debate, months of emotional negotiation and thousands of emotional comments by people on both sides of the issue. If approved, it will make a real difference in policing in Massachusetts. 

There are many brave and honorable police officers in this state and there are many excellent police leaders as well. Some of them take personally the proposition that improvement is needed. That is unfortunate. We need to keep reassuring them that we do not mean to question their commitment, integrity, or competence. 

At the same time, we need to recognize that we can do better. We need to admit that there are some departments in the state where civilian complaints of mistreatment are badly neglected. One need look no further than the recent United States Department of Justice investigation into the police department in the City of Springfield.   

Citizens — and honorable police officers — do need stronger protection from rogue officers and the package before the Governor will offer that protection. At the heart of the package is a new statewide oversight agency for policing: The Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (POST).   

The POST will have the power to directly receive a complaint of misconduct from any source. Additionally, all law enforcement agencies in the state will have to promptly report to the POST any complaints that they receive.   

The POST has the power to certify officers and the power to decertify them. Without certification by the POST, law enforcement officers cannot work in law enforcement. In response to serious misconduct, the POST may choose to consider suspending or decertifying an officer. It will be much harder to bury a complaint of serious misconduct.   

That does not mean that officers will be presumed to be in the wrong when a complaint is filed. On the contrary, they will benefit from strong procedural protections. When a complaint is made, officers will usually go through the local discipline process as they do now. But the result of that process will be reported to the POST and the POST will have the resources to independently investigate if it deems it necessary. 

If the POST opens an investigation and concludes that an officer’s conduct merits a suspension or decertification, the POST may impose a preliminary suspension, but only after a hearing and a finding that the weight of the evidence favors a finding against the officer. During a preliminary suspension, an officer may remain on the agency payroll. 

A final suspension or decertification can only be imposed upon “clear and convincing evidence.” That is a very high bar — professionals in other fields can typically lose their license on lesser findings. It makes sense that police officers should have a somewhat higher threshold for losing their license — they are often in an adversarial relationship with people that they arrest and they can draw complaints even when they behave professionally. 

The POST commission will consist of nine members appointed by the Governor and the Attorney General. The commission will include three police officers, three civilians and three additional civilians nominated from lists submitted by the National Association of Social Workers, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, and the civil rights and social justice section of the Massachusetts Bar Association. 

POST commissions, in the other 46 states that have them, are completely dominated by law enforcement officers. Due to their make up and/or their limited powers, POST commissions in other states have allowed tragic abuses to continue, leading to civil unrest.  

In departing from national precedent by creating a majority civilian commission with great power, we hope to give citizens confidence in the commission’s independence and to assure that real transparency and accountability come to law enforcement in Massachusetts.  

More information available here.

OP-ED: Education Reform Bill Would Provide More Funding

State Sen. Will Brownsberger

The following piece was provided by State Sen. Will Brownsberger, D – Belmont, who also represents Watertown and parts of Boston:

Friday, the legislature’s Education Committee released the Student Opportunity Act, a very significant education reform bill. It is an especially promising bill because the House and Senate leadership teams are already in agreement on all of its details. 

The bill targets more aid to communities with the highest concentrations of low income students, but schools in every community will benefit. The state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) computes a budget for each school system in the state, known as the “Foundation Budget.” DESE also computes an amount that the school system should be able to contribute towards that budget. The state then sends the difference between what the community can afford and the Foundation Budget as education aid. Unfortunately, the Foundation Budget computation has not kept up with rising school costs. On average, communities need to spend approximately 30 percent more than the Foundation Budget to run their schools. The poorest communities in the state are unable to spend at that level and are therefore spending much less than the more affluent communities in the state.