This most walkable of cities trips up when it comes to fixing sidewalks
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
A world-class city is only as good as its infrastructure. And there are those who question the city's priorities with its construction, deconstruction, and reconstruction of bike lanes even as the backlog of sidewalk complaints lingers.
Advertisement
'Every neighborhood should have nice smooth streets and sidewalks. Why are we so far behind?' City Councilor Erin Murphy asked in an interview with the editorial board. 'What other things have become priorities? Bike lanes? Free bus lanes? White Stadium?'
Murphy filed an order for a council hearing on the sidewalk issue in April after getting a pile of messages from angry constituents about unanswered 311 complaints about hazardous sidewalks. The hearing is scheduled for July 22, and when she announced that on her
Advertisement
Like this one from Kristen Sweeney Berry of Roslindale, whose husband uses a wheelchair. 'Boston's sidewalks aren't just inconvenient — they're often impassable and frequently violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
'Cracked pavement, missing curb cuts, and blocked pathways don't just inconvenience residents — they exclude an entire community from full participation in city life.'
Ruthie Burton complained that repeated 311 requests about sidewalks in the Tommy's Rock section of Roxbury have gone unanswered.
In fact, the city acknowledges that of the
At the time a
Then, of course, once a pedestrian has navigated the cracked sidewalk and the deteriorated curb ramp, there's the
Advertisement
The asphalt hodgepodge lurking at the corner of Tremont and School streets is an obvious one. And Murphy said she is still nursing a sore knee from an unfortunate encounter with a pothole in the Blackstone Block Historic District right near City Hall.
All three — sidewalks, curbs, and potholes — are sure to become issues in the mayoral election — right up there with, and not unrelated to, bike lanes.
Mayor Michelle Wu's chief rival, Josh Kraft, who has already vowed a
The city does have a
And it has budgeted some $55 million in its five-year Capital Plan for sidewalk and ramp reconstruction to 'enhance walkability, meet ADA standards, and create a safer, more inclusive public right-of-way.' When it comes to bike lanes, it's not either-or: The city can have bike lanes
and
safe sidewalks, but that would be an easier case for the mayor to make if the city started meeting its commitments on sidewalks.
Advertisement
Boston has always ranked high among the nation's
Sure, Boston has winters that are rough on infrastructure and a construction and repair season that is shortened by those sometimes long winters. But faulty sidewalks are a scourge that has spared no neighborhood. And while, according to a
The city has acknowledged the scope of the problem — and an $800 million backlog is no small problem. If people keep filing 311 complaints but don't seem to get results — well that's a real problem and it cries out for more than a
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
20 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's attack on in-state tuition for Dreamers is bad law — and worse policy
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Other surveys — by the Advertisement Among the targets of the administration's hostility, none elicits more sympathy from the public than the so‑called Dreamers — young people brought here unlawfully as children, who have grown up as Americans in everything but paperwork. (According to Gallup, Advertisement In lawsuits filed this spring against Texas, Minnesota, and Kentucky, the Justice Department maintains that offering in‑state tuition to students without legal immigration status — even if they were brought here as small children and essentially grew up American — violates federal law. In reality, it is the administration's assault that distorts federal law. It is also a brazen power grab that tramples states' rights, to say nothing of basic decency. Beginning in 2001, Democratic and Republican legislatures decided that if young people grow up in a state, are educated in its schools, and want to pursue higher education within its borders, it makes no sense to penalize them financially merely because of their immigration status. If there are good reasons to give a break on tuition to local students who want to go to a local college, what difference does it make whether they have a passport, a green card, or neither? Yet on April 28, President Trump Advertisement But that isn't true. Federal law does not say that undocumented immigrants must be excluded from any in-state tuition benefit. It Accordingly, the states that offer reduced tuition to undocumented immigrants condition the offer on criteria other than residency. States that offer in‑state tuition to undocumented students are acting not just humanely but rationally. Such policies reflect the common-sense principle that justifies giving a tuition break to any local student: It is in every state's interest to help its homegrown young people be as successful and well educated as possible. Lower tuition makes higher education more affordable, which in turn boosts the number of local families that can send their kids to college, which in turn expands the state's population of educated adults. A more educated population strengthens the state's economy, since college graduates are more likely to be employed and to earn higher incomes. For states like Massachusetts, which suffers from high outmigration, a particularly strong argument for the in-state tuition break is that graduates of public institutions are more likely to Advertisement None of these arguments has any logical connection to immigration or citizenship. They apply with equal force to those born abroad and to those born locally. And it is irrelevant whether those born abroad were brought to America by parents who had immigration visas or by parents who didn't. Dreamers aren't freeloaders. Like their families, they pay taxes — property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, and even the payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare benefits, for which they are ineligible. (In 2022, according to the latest estimate from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, undocumented immigrants Aside from the Trumpian hard core, most Americans sympathize with the plight of undocumented immigrants who grew up in this country and have known no other home. That explains why (as Gallup reports) 85 percent of them would like Congress to make it possible for them to acquire citizenship. It also explains why in-state tuition for Dreamers has bipartisan support: The states that have enacted such policies include Oklahoma, Kentucky, California, and New York. Advertisement The Trump administration's lawsuits deserve to be dismissed on their legal merits, but they also deserve to be reviled as one more example of MAGA malevolence, which is grounded in nothing except a desire to hurt immigrants — Few Americans have any desire to punish young people who have done nothing wrong. The cruelty at the heart of Trump's immigration policy may thrill his base, but it repels a far larger America unwilling to abandon its values. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
Boston Globe
20 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Citizens of nowhere
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Some stateless people entered the United States and remain here legally, protected by asylum or another status. But like many undocumented immigrants, most live in the shadows, careful not to attract attention and unable to do anything that requires state identification. As such, many are unable to find regular work and can only get by on jobs that pay cash and don't ask too many questions. Others take the risky step of fighting for asylum, work authorization, and other protections. Advertisement Like other undocumented immigrants, some people who are stateless remain in the country illegally because they also have nowhere to go. Amadou was allowed to temporarily reenter the United States by the Biden administration. He lives in Ohio with his family. Huiyee Chiew One such stateless person is Amadou, a 59-year-old electrician from Mauritania, who arrived in the United States more than 25 years ago, fleeing conflict that had broken out between his home country and Senegal. (Amadou is a pseudonym. His name is being withheld to protect his identity.) Advertisement Like thousands of others without nationalities, he became a citizen of nowhere for reasons beyond his control. People may become stateless because they are born to parents without nationalities — one of the world's largest groups of stateless people are the Rohingya, a Muslim minority group who live in Myanmar and face persecution. Or they live through the dissolution of their home country, like Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union, or more recently Sudan or South Sudan, or their government restricts access to citizenship for some groups — like the Bedoons, an Arab minority in Kuwait, who Born and raised in Arab-dominated Mauritania, Amadou lived an uneventful life until a border dispute erupted with neighboring Senegal in 1989. The conflict escalated into ethnic violence, and the Mauritanian government stripped tens of thousands of Black Mauritanians of their citizenship and expelled them to Senegal. Amadou was one of them. Left with nothing and without any legal documents, he survived by doing farmwork. He often went hungry. In 2000, he fled to the United States in the hope of getting asylum. To enter the United States, he used a passport obtained by a friend with connections in the Mauritanian government. Amadou knew the passport deal was illegal, but he had no other choice. He was able to use the fraudulent passport to apply for a US tourist visa and boarded a flight for New York. Once here, he applied for asylum. In the years waiting for his asylum petition to be decided, he lived in Ohio, working as an electrician. But in 2007 his petition was denied and he was ordered to leave the country. The irony is that Amadou's asylum petition was denied in part because the court said that the conditions in Mauritania had improved and that he was unlikely to face persecution if he returned — which would have been relevant if Amadou was indeed still a citizen of that country. Advertisement Lynn Tramonte, the director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance, is familiar with Amadou's case. She has witnessed how a lack of understanding among lawyers and immigration judges about statelessness in cases involving Black Mauritanians often leads to deportation. 'Every day [people like Amadou] get a reminder that no country claims you. It's like you are a ghost. But you are still a person,' says Tramonte. Amadou's former attorney, Aneesha Gandhi, says he was not immediately deported in 2007 because Immigration and Customs Enforcement was unable to obtain travel documents for him from the Mauritanian government — unsurprising given that it had revoked his citizenship. So instead, he was placed under an order of supervision and allowed to remain and work in the United States until a solution could be found. That meant reporting regularly to ICE. Amadou says he never missed a check-in. He complied with ICE's requirement to apply for travel documents through the Mauritanian embassy, but the officials there ignored his requests. As an electrician, Amadou always carries his helmet and tool bag to work. Huiyee Chiew And so years passed. Amadou worked in construction, married, and had three children. He and his wife, who is undocumented, settled down in an Ohio suburb. He allowed himself to believe he would be able to stay in the United States, even if he couldn't figure out a path to legal residency. ICE officials had told him so. Advertisement Amadou lives by his grandfather's words: 'Make it good, make it well, make it right.' He focused on working hard, paying taxes, following the law, and raising a happy family. But being stateless, he knew his life could be upended in an instant, no matter how hard he worked to make his immigration status right. Then Donald Trump took office in 2017. Stateless in the age of Trump President Trump has called the asylum system the ' Unlike the Obama administration, which prioritized the deportation of people who had recently been ordered to leave and allowed both ICE attorneys and immigration officers more discretion in individual cases, the first Trump administration targeted all noncitizens who had outstanding orders of removal, old and new, according to the In late 2018, ICE arrested Amadou without warning during a routine check-in. The officers, he recalled, were aggressive, questioning how someone like him with a removal order could have children here. He did not answer but lowered his head. They handcuffed him and took him into custody. Amadou's wife became the family's anchor after his deportation. Huiyee Chiew Amadou spent eight months in ICE detention before authorities finally obtained a temporary travel document to deport him back to Mauritania. The catch: His travel document, issued by Mauritania, only allowed him to stay in that country for 90 to 120 days. (The Mauritanian embassy did not respond to questions about Amadou's case.) Advertisement When Amadou landed in Mauritania, immigration officers barred him from entering the country, saying, 'You are not a Mauritanian.' With nowhere else to go, Amadou traveled to neighboring Senegal to meet relatives of his with the help of a friend. The only things he had were a cane to help him walk, because of a quickly deteriorating necrotic hip, and a plastic bag holding some clothes. 'You don't have papers, you don't have anything,' Amadou said. Back in Ohio, Amadou's family struggled to stay afloat. They didn't see Amadou again for six years. Living in limbo At the end of 2024, Amadou was granted humanitarian parole by the Biden administration, allowing him to temporarily enter the United States. He returned to his home in Ohio. Amadou's humanitarian parole, however, has an expiration date. He is now trying every possible avenue to find a legal way to stay. He has reason to worry. President Trump has called for mass deportations, enhanced ICE enforcement, and the rollback of parole programs. In January, he suspended asylum applications at the southern border, citing an ' Samantha Sitterley, a staff attorney at The bill, first introduced by Representative Jamie Raskin and Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland in 2022, addresses statelessness by establishing a federal definition, determination procedure, protective status, and a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship. It was written by advocates and experts in the field, including United Stateless, and stateless individuals themselves. If passed, the bill could end the legal limbo for stateless persons like Amadou. Advertisement But the chances of passing the bill seem slim for now. Realistically, Sitterley said, the Department of Homeland Security should at least adopt a statelessness definition to ensure a more consistent and humanitarian approach toward stateless people. David Baluarte, a law professor specializing in immigration at the City University of New York School of Law, and who previously worked with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees on a study of statelessness, recalled that when he started working on the issue during the Obama administration, few even knew what 'stateless' meant. And although awareness has grown, political will to do anything about the problem has not. 'The perception [of the current administration] is that they [immigrants] are the problem: 'We need to get rid of them,'' he says. 'Congress is not going to prioritize immigration legislation right now.' He is also concerned about attacks on birthright citizenship. If that constitutional right were taken away, the United States would face a growing stateless population of children born within its borders to undocumented and stateless immigrants. Amadou prays regularly and gives thanks to God for helping him get through difficult times. Huiyee Chiew For Amadou, life remains uncertain. But his years away from his family have shown him to embrace what time he does have with them. After all, everything could change tomorrow.
Boston Globe
20 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's cuts threaten to rip research up by the roots
The chain saw approach to medical research funding is not just reckless — it's shortsighted. The families of the richest 2 percent also get cancer and other deadly diseases, and no amount of money can buy a cure that doesn't exist. Advertisement Dennis E. Noonan Wellesley Thank you for Kara Miller's article on the challenges of long-term research in the face of the Trump administration's cuts ( Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up While only a small fraction of original ideas achieve success as envisioned, scientists consistently persevere with passion for their ideas. The research environment overall, however, brings waves of advances. Unlike the business and dealmaking mind-set of the current administration's so-called leaders, scientists are not self-promoters by type. They struggle for funding over years, driven by their passion for making a difference for the world. Advertisement The most telling risk inherent in the Trump cuts is the potential impact on global competition. As Miller points out, for decades some of the world's best minds have come here, with the United States having benefited. But more recently, greater global tools and competition have prompted serious foreign competition for the best minds — and for the opportunities to control future technologies. The administration's cuts would put the United States more than a generation behind in our children's and grandchildren's future world. Larry Kennedy Jacksonville, Fla. I weep when I see what the Trump administration is doing to our country and our world. Kara Miller's article on the savaging of basic science — 'research aimed at understanding rather than commercializing' — is but one example. This type of research may have no application right away. However, over 20 or 30 years, many dozens of applications may emerge, often covering many different fields. The original development rarely occurs in business laboratories because there is no immediate payoff. It is therefore essential that government continue to fund basic science. As Miller points out, a stable flow of funding is essential for the production of a continuing stream of research results. Disruption of the Trumpian kind has several undesirable results: Besides stopping the flow of original ideas, over the long term it will reduce our capacity to learn from and absorb ideas produced in other countries. We have seen mid-career scientists being welcomed by other countries while the paths of early-career scientists have been demolished. American politicians, Republican and Democratic alike, must stand up to the president and say, 'Basic research is the seed corn for 'Making America Great Again.' It must not be destroyed.' They should then act and vote accordingly in Congress. Advertisement Martin G. Evans Cambridge The writer is a professor emeritus at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.
