Speaking for myself, evidence-based argument is always preferred to partisan, ideological, and/or uneducated sniping.
i'm involved in the process. i attend the meetings and listen to the professional obstructionists, and speak to them directly and cordially. i do what i can to point out when they're wrong, or being unfair to the young people coming up.... i'm familiar with their tactics. Some of their points are valid. The city faces numerous challenges of its economics and physical infrastructure.
As to becoming an educated sniper:
i can only speak for myself. But what are working people, busy raising families supposed to do to act as a fair, counterbalance to retired nimby's able to devote all their free time to thwarting positive change in Boston? They just don't have the time to compete with them and the iag crowd.
There seems to be a cozy relationship between Wu and the overlords of these highly organized individuals who pack the iag's on big impact projects.
i lurk on the online City Council meetings sometimes ahead of key EDIC Board meetings, listen and read public comments--and numerous offerings Wu has made for the big projects over the past few years.
Winthrop Square is Downtown Crossing. Wu wasn't going to stop it. She wanted it to go 400'. Doesn't stop there. She's always either completely against these projects, suggests unworkable fixes, or parrots the Galer, Frazee talking points.
Worse, there's an insincere tone elsewhere, not much different than Tito Jackson's obstruction, but dressed up way more. It's sweet talking and clever. But, She's taking the nimby route to gain notoriety with the millionaire crowd, eager to build her resume and nobility as a fighter for the people. She's not representing the little guy, or posturing to improve the process. Far from it. She'll put development and efforts to solve the housing crisis back years.
This could really go either way.
No. it won't go "either way." It's reasonable to hold the opinion the BPDA leaves much to be desired. But abolishing it, and getting this so-called "people's process" will only bring out the retired folk, with all their free time to remove the reasonable voice (the EDIC Board), and put an end to development.
Re-zoning? That'll be the day. Worse, and far more significant: Projects are often years in the making, require studies, millions in investment and consulting with engineers and highly qualified professionals at the BPDA to get projects off the ground. Intricate planning goes in long before the public unveiling/s.
Wu will add extreme uncertainty and risk. Developers, all but the biggest players will opt out of the process for parts unknown....
(what other choice will they have?)
You're not only killing the latter part of that process. You're dropping a bomb on the pipeline. The old BRA of 1959 hurt people. No BPDA, will have a similar, catastrophic effect on Boston and set the City back years, while we wait for Wu to be gone--and something akin to Walsh/Golden's BPDA to return.
Sorry: There is a price to pay for wrecking a City's ability to provide a clear path to development--with real consequences. People, especially the most economically at risk will be hurt by accepting Wu's reckless agenda...
My point of view isn't extreme. She's simply not qualified or earned the right to blow up Boston. There's no nice way to dress up a mugging. Dress up nice and charm people. When you mug the process and hurt them--you're a thug.