The Proposed New Cambridge Charter – For Better or Worse – April 14, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
My taxes are almost done (yeah, I never get an early start), and the City Council meets on the eve of Tax Day. Here are the agenda items that distracted me this week:
Money Talks
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Federal update.
pulled by Nolan; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang re: Harvard President Alan Garber’s announcement to not cooperate w/threats from Trump Administration, courage of students and others in standing up to administration; cancellation of federal grants, breach of order by federal government, positions terminated, programs cut or eliminated (such as LIHEAP), danger of the coming years, confronting the federal government; comments by Nolan, Siddiqui (asks about Volpe, no word yet); Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge FY2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Claire Spinner (Finance), Joseph McCann (Auditor), Robert Mahoney (independent audit consultant), Zusy, Simmons; Placed on File 9-0
Talking about Transportation
Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-67 regarding Cambridge Bicycle Plan Update and Consideration of Network Connections. (CM25#82) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Brooke McKenna (TPT), Stephanie Groll (Transportation Planning - now part of Transportation Department), Toner (on how CSO might be modified), Owen O’Riordan (looking at all modes of traffic, achieving a high degree of consensus), Zusy, Wilson (wants more details in spelling out the “network”, EW routes vs. NS routes; McKenna talks about the 2015 process and “vision”, calls NS routes “low speed, low volume” vs. EW routes “requiring” separation; Wilson asks how Broadway became included in current plan, McKenna says it was added in the 2020 plan; Nick Schmidt (new pedestrian and bicycle program manager) introduced; McKenna says development of the Network Vision independent of the Cycling Safety Ordinance, claims there was a public process [Is that really true? - I don’t recall there be any such process.]; Wilson addresses broader concerns re: CSO and needs of actual people; McGovern says Main Street was not part of the Ordinance, McKenna says the Ordinance calls for 25 miles, some streets (the “special four”) specified, says Brattle Street and Main Street “essential” to be added to network; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-23 regarding a Citywide Shuttle Bus Pilot program. (CM25#84) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Toner, Zusy, Siddiqui, Brooke McKenna; Referred to both Neighborhood & Long-Range Planning Committee and Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0
Committee Report #2. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee held a public hearing on Mon, Mar 17, 2025 with MIT transportation experts and City staff to brainstorm ways to better accommodate mobility for all users as we continue to promote the use of sustainable modes. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (McGovern - Absent)
This and That
Order #1. City Council opposition to Federal efforts to defund or censor museums. Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Nolan; comments by Simmons, Nolan; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Order #2. That the City Council go on record declaring Earth Day, April 22 in the year 2025 “Sustainable Cambridge Day” and that the City Manager is requested to communicate to all City departments the City’s commitment to our climate goals and the need to support the efforts of the Sustainable Cambridge initiative. Councillor Nolan, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Nolan for comments; Order Adopted 9-0
Charter Right #1. Continued funding of the Transitional Wellness Center. [Charter Right – Toner, Apr 7, 2025]
McGovern proposed amendment Adopted 7-0-0-2 (Azeem, Zusy - Present); Toner notes Human Services Committee meeting on this topic, Manager was clear about lack of funding for continued operation; City Manager Huang comments on Cambridge many investments for unhoused communities, fact that this proposed expenditure would add considerable expense and City is already opening permanent supporting housing; Toner, Zusy to vote No while acknowledging good services provided by the TWC; McGovern challenges Zusy unnecessarily, gets agitated suggesting he’ll just bring this up again, suggests false choices between this and trees and other matters, calls his colleagues statements “shameful”; Sobrinho-Wheeler supports the Order and suggests lack of prioritization process, wants the City Council to take more control of the Budget process (bad idea); Nolan notes that there is a lot of desire to fund everything, but it’s unfair to shame each other on financial and other decisions, does not agree with referring this to Finance Committee; Simmons expresses concerns about promoting a program that is not well run; Wilson will vote Yes on the proposal; McGovern comments; Yi-An Huang notes that if we had no resources there would be no hard choices, and some (limited) funding creates environment where priorities must be set and choices must be made, and further notes that federal cuts can affect local choices, each year’s budget feeds into the next year’s budget; McGovern again suggests that this should be a priority in addition to other pet projects like municipal broadband; Siddiqui suggests rethinking the Wednesday’s Finance Committee meeting agenda, continues to promote her own “Rise Up” local welfare program; Azeem notes simultaneous expiration of ARPA funding and losses in federal funding, asks when any decisions re: Spaulding program must be made; Ellen Semonoff says a date is difficult to determine - there are 22 people still at TWC, and the longer people stay based on possibility of extension the more likely they may find themselves with no next step, notes that if TWC does not close now it will be more difficult to do so in the future; City Manager notes that funding TWC will make it more difficult to fund a successor program to the “Rise Up” local welfare program; Nolan additional comments re: many proposed projects; McGovern objects to suggestion of vouchers vs. TWC; Order Adopted as Amended 5-4; Reconsideration Fails 0-9
[My own personal opinion is that this entire conversation is proof positive why it would be a terrible idea to have legislators wrest more control over city management with the goal of promoting specific (often politically motivated) projects - the essential definition of political patronage – which can sometimes produce good benefits, but often not. I will add that if some of the current councillors could have their way, property taxes would soar, especially in light of recent news regarding Kendall Square commercial property challenges and their tax levy implications.]
Only 279 Communications this week. One, in particular, stood out above all the others:
Communication #208. Patrick W Barrett III, re: PO25#49. [text of communication]
Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Mar 5, 2025 to receive an update on the state of the arts in Cambridge and discuss how the City is currently supporting artists and art organizations through grant programs and funding, with a focus on the Central Square Cultural district. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (McGovern - Absent)
The Cambridge Charter
Committee Report #3. The Cambridge City Council’s Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review was held on Fri, Mar 28, 2025 to review the communication from the City Solicitor with updates in the Charter review process that was referred from the Mar 17, 2025 City Council meeting. [text of report]
Rules Suspended to take up early along with Comm & Reports #2 and #3; Siddiqui thanks all involved; Toner comments; March 28, 2025 revisions voted Adopted 9-0; Committee Report Placed on File 9-0; Comm. & Reports #2 Placed on File 9-0 (superseded by ; City Solicitor Megan Bayer walks through changes in latest Draft; Siddiqui motion to accept latest changes Adopted 9-0; comments by Nolan re: Charter Review Committee; Sobrinho-Wheeler addresses removal procedures, McKenna notes state law regarding conviction of felony and removal upon sentencing (as was the case with former Councillor William Walsh in 1994); Zusy on review of ordinances every decade, Mayer responds [Note: They used to be not only reviewed but frequently published as a bound volume], McKenna notes that existing ordinances would be a 6 inch wide bound volume; Simmons speaks on half of School Committee member Caroline Hunter re: role of the Mayor on the School Committee; McGovern remarks on review of ordinances suggesting that the period of review be baked into the ordinance language itself; Wilson expresses gratitude to Law Department and Charter Review Committee, how to put into practice the review of ordinances, Bayer notes this would be a significant undertaking; Megan Bayer notes that many City departments are affected by ordinances and that they should be involved in their review; Siddiqui acknowledges Clerk’s Office, notes many CRC recommendation that have been referred to Government Operations for future consideration; McGovern says Gov’t Operations meetings will be scheduled; Toner asks if charter review must be done every 10 years or does clock start w/adoption of any revision, Bayer notes that it would be every 10 years (in a year ending in a ”2”); Home Rule Petition Adopted 9-0
Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from City Solicitor Megan B. Bayer, transmitting an update regarding Revised Charter Draft including Home Rule Draft.
Placed on File 9-0 (superseded by late communication below)
Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from City Solicitor Megan B. Bayer, transmitting - Updated City Charter Revised Charter Draft.
Placed on File 9-0; Home Rule Petition Adopted 9-0
Late Order #3. That the City Council approve the motions that passed favorably in the Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review on March 28, 2025. Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#55)
Order Adopted 9-0
Late Order #4. That the Council accept the new additional changes as detailed that the Law Department has made that the Special Committee did not vote on. Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#56)
Order Adopted 9-0
Late Order #5. That the City Council petition the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to enact the attached home rule petition entitled, AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE; provided, that the Legislature may make such incidental changes necessary to effectuate passage of this petition. Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#57)
Order Adopted 9-0
Late Order #6. That the City Council request that State Rep. Marjorie Decker sponsor the home rule petition entitled AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE. Councillor Siddiqui
Nolan amends to have rest of delegation invited, Siddiqui very truculent in response; Amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (McGovern - Absent); Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (McGovern - Absent)
This has been a long haul, and not such a pleasant one. On the bright side, there won’t be any major changes to the general framework of Cambridge municipal government. We’ll still have a city manager form of government with all at-large elections conducted via proportional representation with some added flexibility for the Election Commission to slightly modify the tabulation methods (the one thing I wanted to see for many years). The City Council will continue to choose their own Chair (the Mayor), but the Mayor will serve as an ordinary member of the School Committee with its Chair being elected by the School Committee (something I suggested over 20 years ago). Also, I was finally heard regarding the matter of keeping intact the current mechanisms for Resident Initiative Petitions and Referenda (which the City Council had originally eliminated). The updating of the language and overall structure of the proposed Charter is also a worthwhile change.
On the negative side (for starters): (a) the selection of the original Charter Review Committee was tainted and driven by the whims of the Mayor at that time; (b) the current penalties under the Plan E Charter for City Council interference (not acting through the City Manager) were eliminated (a very bad thing); and (c) at every step the City Council insisted on greater control of budgetary matters, board appointments, and more. I can only speculate how the whole procedure may have been different (and probably better) had there been an actual Charter Commission - as opposed to having only incumbent city councillors having any say regarding any changes in the structure our municipal government.
Assuming the posted draft of the new Charter is approved by the City Council, it will then have to be reviewed by the Attorney General and the Home Rule Petition will have to be approved by the State Legislature. If all that takes place, it will then come back to the voters of Cambridge - optimistically in time for the November 2025 election, but it could potentially be further delayed. - Robert Winters
Tending the Garden (Street) - April 7, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
  |
Not that you could ever tell from the scandalous focus of the local tabloids, but the Big Issue residents are hotly debating now is whether the Garden Street road configuration should stay or go. Beyond the sideshows and the political posturing and opportunism, here are a few things of interest on this week’s agenda:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Cambridge Public Schools’ long-term facilities condition assessment. [text of report]
pulled by Wilson; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang, Interim School Superintendent David Murphy, Councillors Wilson, Nolan, Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a proposed amendment to the Drought Ordinance. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; Unfinished Business #4 brought forward; Placed on File 9-0
Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, relative to Cambridge Municipal Code 13.08, Water System Regulations and Chapter 13.12, Water Reservoirs. [Passed to 2nd Reading Mar 24, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained Apr 7, 2025] [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; Ordained as Amended 9-0
Order #1. That the City Council send a formal invitation to Mr. Gerald Chan to come before the Economic Development and University Relations Committee to answer questions and present his plans for the Harvard Square Movie Theater, as well as his other vacant properties in the City. Vice Mayor McGovern, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by McGovern (paradoxically endorsing nostalgia and preservation while simultaneously endorsing wholesale changes in built environment); comments by Siddiqui re: legal imitations in what Council can do; comments by Wilson, Simmons; Toner proposes amendment to bring in 23 other vacant storefront owners; Zusy supports amendment, wants to extend to other property owners but without shaming; McGovern OK with amendment but expects this will take several meetings, dismisses suggestion that this is “shaming”; Zusy suggests that singling out one property owner not ideal, there are broader considerations; Amendment Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Committee Report #1. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on Tues, Mar 11, 2025 with the City Solicitor and the Community Development Department, Economic Opportunity Division, to discuss concerns with vacant store fronts and commercial properties in Cambridge, and prior efforts and possible options such as new policies, taxes, and/or fines to reduce the number of vacant store fronts and commercial properties in Cambridge. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Order #2. Continued funding of the Transitional Wellness Center. Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by McGovern with some history of funding for this facility; Sobrinho-Wheeler advocates for keeping it open beyond ARPA funding; Wilson comments; Yi-An Huang notes current funding is ~$3 million/year which would likely rise, contracts would need to be extended, more information for these and similar services will be forthcoming; Charter Right - Toner
Charter Right #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-68 re: Garden Street two-way traffic alternatives. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mar 31, 2025] [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler (JSW) along with Charter Right #3; Placed on File 9-0
Charter Right #3. That the City Manager and appropriate staff move forward with Option 4 to reopen Garden Street to two-way traffic while maintaining separated bike lanes. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mar 31, 2025]
pulled by Toner along with Charter Right #1; JSW proposed amendment by substitution calling for more analysis and not moving forward with Option #4; Toner expresses appreciation for JSW amendment but wants to move forward with 2-way preference; Nolan notes that there have already been many changes to other road redesigns, supports bi-directional bike lanes as safest alternative; Siddiqui aligns w/JSW; Azeem agrees w/JSW amendment and focuses on cost of different options; TPT Director Brooke McKenna suggests estimated cost of Option #4 to be $137,000 with timeline of Summer 2026, additional costs associated w/utilities; Azeem uses cost to rationalize making no changes; Zusy suggests that JSW amendment would just be “kicking the can down the road”, need to take a vote on this now and resolve outstanding issues re: loading zones, etc.; Wilson appreciates spirit of JSW amendment, notes that these issues are city-wide pinning neighbors against each other, making movement across the city difficult, insufficient outreach to those affected; McGovern notes dissatisfaction of some neighbors but wants to keep current configuration; JSW Amendment Fails 4-5 (BA,MM,SS,JSW-Yes; PN,PT,AW,CZ,DS-No); Toner notes that some will be unhappy either way, resounding push-back after restricting to 1-way; Nolan notes that many came out in support for Option #1 (keep 1-way) due to organized effort, speaks in support of bi-directional bike lanes, notes $50 million on Mass. Ave. due to provision of bike lanes; Zusy notes that while TPT reports were rational there is also need for safety for drivers and not just cyclists, 42,000 registered vehicles and Garden Street a strongly preferred route for hundreds of years, rollover accidents caused by current configuration, school-related traffic increases anticipated; Siddiqui says safety data supports Option #1, but McKenna says crash analysis has not been done, acknowledges increase in rollover crashes but does not ascribe cause; McKenna notes potential congestion problems (which is interesting in that the TPT position has been in favor of congestion in that it leads to reduced speeds); Yi-An Huang notes that bike lane debates among most contentious in many communities, notes the many trade-offs; Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan notes thought given by TPT in regard to Garden Street and other streets where road configurations are planned, notes that all four options provide safe passage for all users; Wilson comments on difficult and divisive conversation, notes similar shifting points of view in Cambridge and other communities, fact that there have been fatalities last year - all on roads with separated bike lanes; JSW notes that if Option #4 is chosen there are limited means to provide replacement parking or loading zones (which didn’t seem to be a concern for the Mass. Ave. bike lanes); McGovern expresses concerns about the “pendulum” of changing back and forth, acknowledges complaints about Brattle Street bi-directional bike lanes; McKenna notes concerns about people not looking both ways when crossing bi-directional bike lanes; Simmons motion to end debate Prevails 8-1 (SS-No); Order (to move forward w/Option #4 - 2-way operation of Garden Street) Adopted 5-4 (PN,PT,AW,CZ,DS-Yes; BA,MM,SS,JSW-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9
Note: The notion that the City Council should not be making decisions on road configurations that would revert Garden Street to 2-way traffic is ironic to say the least. The entire (amended) Cycling Safety Ordinance that mandated specific treatments for specific roads was based on this same sort of “political traffic engineering”. It seems pretty clear to many of us that this level of micromanagement is fundamentally problematic, and it is, in fact, the rigidity of the timelines that were established in the Ordinance that have created all of this mess. I will add that this entire topic is mainly about “winning” for the Cambridge Bike Safety group.
656 Communications - almost all of which have to do with Garden Street bike lanes and parking, plus a lesser number having to do with (a) Half-Crown Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District (and ABC’s never-ending quest to bulldoze Cambridge history), and (b) “Our squares and corridors”. There were relatively few about the Councillor Toner situation, and opinions varied widely. Clearly, bike lanes and the built environment (including glass houses) are higher on the list of resident priorities.
Late Order #4. That the City Council formally go on record to urge, in the strongest possible terms, the Harvard Corporation to stand up in defense of the values that are fundamental to both the University and our democracy; and that the City Manager be and hereby is requested to act with urgency and coordinate a response and consult with all relevant city, regional, and state entities to develop a united front and take all action possible to counter this assault on the foundational values of our city as a center of higher learning. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Mayor Simmons (PO25#52)
Comments by Nolan; Yi-An Huang remarks noting centuries-old relationship between Harvard and Cambridge, need to stand up to Trump Administration and their unlawful actions; Simmons and all councillors ask to be added as sponsors and that this be also directed to our legislative delegation; Siddiqui notes Globe opinion article by Niko Bowie and Benjamin Edelson entitled “Harvard’s Moment of Truth”; McGovern comments re: “vindictive bullies” (irony noted); Azeem asks about what actions City could take; Yi-An Huang notes that having City Council on record is important, ongoing meetings with the Harvard Corporation, action of taking a $750 million bond to ensure liquidity in the event of shut-off of federal funding, growing set of faculty and alumni speaking up, “there is a voice of truth and integrity that needs to come out”; Nolan amendment Adopted as Amended 9-0
Playing Politics – March 31, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
While there are some featured attractions at the circus, it’s the side shows that get the most attention. After the “vigils”, the selective outrage, and competing efforts to pack Public Comment have passed, here are some of the more significant things on the agenda this week:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Federal update.
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang on staff reduction in federal agencies, concerns about long-term local impacts, loss of funding to local programs, changes in public housing eligibility and subsidies, actions by ICE w/o due process, hope for judicial intervention and correction, City signing on to legal challenges; comments by Siddiqui, Nolan, Wilson, Simmons - especially in regard to Cambridge Housing Authority; Placed on File 9-0
This will likely be a regular agenda item for the foreseeable future as the repercussions of current federal policies affect local programs - and sometimes wreak havoc. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in terms of the City’s FY2026 Budget, program cuts, subsidized housing eligibility, reallocation of resources, and the potential for local tax increases to offset discontinued federal funding. This is somewhat reminiscent of the weekly COVID updates of a few years ago.
Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-53, regarding assisting companies, institutions, and other organizations in adopting truck safety requirements. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler (JSW); comments by JSW, Brooke McKenna (TPT), Toner, Zusy, Wilson; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-66 regarding an automated parking enforcement draft home rule petition. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, City Solicitor Megan Bayer, Zusy, Toner, Simmons, Wilson; Order Adopted 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-68 regarding Garden Street two-way traffic alternatives. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; Toner motion requesting staff to move forward with option #4 in report; Nolan comments on bike lanes staying under all options, likes bi-directional bike lanes, two-way traffic lowers traffic speed; McGovern comments - not a clear consensus; Brooke McKenna responds that current configuration is best; JSW inquires about original process, costs of changing configuration; Steven Meuse (TPT) responds re: process, McKenna responds re: costs; JSW wishes to exercise Charter Right on Toner motion (is that an option?); Megan Bayer states that as a new Order, a Charter Right is in order; Simmons explains that a Charter Right should cease discussion; Toner explains original order from last year and that delay will only lead to many communications and public comments at next meeting; Megan Bayer explains best practice re: use of Charter Right; Simmons provides wisdom on this; Charter Right - Sobrinho-Wheeler
I expect plenty of two-way competing testimony on this during Public Comment.
Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Floodplain Zoning Amendments. [text of report]
pulled by McGovern; Order Adopted as City Council Petition 9-0; Referred to Planning Board & Ordinance Committee 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a memo regarding 84 and 96 Bishop Allen RFI submission responses and next steps. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner re: other lots and public-private partnerships; comments by Acting CDD Director Melissa Peters, Sobrinho-Wheeler, McGovern, Zusy (RFPs vs. RFIs, parking), Megan Bayer, Siddiqui, Wilson, Azeem, Simmons (on long history of inaction on Central Square), Yi-An Huang, Nolan; Referred Back to City Manager 9-0
“All but one respondent envisioned a mixed-income housing approach to 84 Bishop Allen Drive. 84 Bishop Allen Drive was seen as large enough to create a meaningful number of affordable units within a mixed income, mixed-use residential building. In contrast, the smaller 96 Bishop Allen Drive site was seen as manageable as an affordable housing only project.” My take is that as more and more required criteria are added the less viable everything becomes. I also expect some Public Comment insisting that the least economically viable options should be the only ones considered.
Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-17 which requested that the City Manager be and hereby is requested to appoint the members of a working committee tasked with integrating the objectives of both the Task Force to Examine the Status and Wellbeing of the City’s African American/Black Population and the Commission on the Status of Black Men and Boys into a unified, actionable framework. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on Harvard PILOT negotiations. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Yi-An Huang, Taha Jennings (Budget Director), Nolan, JSW, Siddiqui; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Wilson Absent)
Interim one-year agreement to increase their annual payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) from $4.7 million to $6 million per year - with the hope of a much longer term agreement after that. Those who actually think about the many important roles our local universities play will also understand how many Cambridge residents are employed by those universities and of the enormous value that provides to Cambridge residents. It is worth emphasizing that our local universities are facing many of the same threats to funding as the City is - likely moreso.
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Department of Public Works to work together with the Chair of the Health and Environment Committee to make appropriate changes to the draft of the Zero Waste Master Plan 2.0 and forward a final draft to the full City Council for approval as the City’s policy document on zero waste. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Wilson
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Wilson Absent)
As with the BEUDO Ordinance, I have some concerns about granting carte-Blanche to the Chair of the Health and Environment Committee to forward a final draft to the City Council that they may not scrutinize prior to approving it. This has become a growing problem in how the City Council has conducted itself over that last several years - especially in our first COVID year when several consequential actions were waved through with minimal scrutiny of possible unintended (and sometimes intended) consequences.
I served on the Recycling Advisory Committee for 22 years and always tried my best to view all proposed changes through the eyes of the residents of the city. We had the enormous benefit of having some very knowledgeable members (I’m thinking of you Rob Gogan) who understood the practical aspects of recycling and not just the idealism and advocacy. The current ZWMP draft includes “Evaluate a hybrid Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) program” among its strategies. Exactly how this might work in a city dominated by multi-family buildings is unclear, and I’m not really sure how people would feel about having to purchase stickers or follow some other protocol to pay for any excess trash above some permitted limit. What works in the suburbs doesn’t necessarily work in a more urban environment.
All that said, I was pleased to see that we appear to be reasonably on target with our previously established waste reduction goals. The last point I will make is one that my friend Sumner Martinson (DEP) emphasized many years ago: We are fundamentally just materials collectors when we put out our recyclable and compostable materials out at the curb for pickup. Recycling is what is done (or not done) at the next step down the road. Waste reduction is important, but recycling is actually carried out by industrial partners when they take the feedstock we produce and remanufacture new products from that feedstock. People love to pat themselves on the back for recycling when they fill their toters, but that’s actually not recycling at all - and the recycling industry continues to suffer out of public view. Glass may be in the worst place at all – it’s more likely to end up as gravel substitute for drainage applications at landfills than be remade into new containers. The economics of recycling is far more important than the idealism of recycling.
Order #2. Appointment of Paula M. Crane as Interim City Clerk effective June 1, 2025. Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Wilson Absent)
I am grateful for Diane LeBlanc’s time with us as Cambridge City Clerk. Her background as an archivist in our very historic city has been a blessing. That said, Paula Crane is an unsung hero in the Office of the City Clerk and she’ll be great in the short- or long-term.
Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department to prioritize Cambridge Street and Northern Massachusetts Avenue first and to introduce the necessary zoning language and to continue working on Central Square as soon as practicable. Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toner
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, McGovern, Zusy, Nolan; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee and Housing Committee held a joint public hearing on Mar 4, 2025 to discuss zoning priorities focusing on major squares and corridors. The Committee voted favorably to recommend that the City Manager be requested to direct the Community Development Department to prioritize Cambridge Street and Northern Massachusetts Avenue first and to introduce the necessary zoning language and to continue working on Central Square as soon as practicable. See PO25#43. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Though there is obviously room for new development in these places, I get the strong feeling that the chief proponents of new development – either residential or commercial – pay very little attention to long-term goals or consequences.
Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Cambridge Police Department, and Human Rights Commission, and local immigrant rights and immigrant-serving organizations to develop and implement policies and protocols to prevent illegal detainment, hold Know Your Rights trainings, and ensure that the City of Cambridge is adequately prepared to respond to and mitigate violations of this nature. Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Azeem; comments by Azeem (wants City’s Law Dept. to intervene), Siddiqui, Wilson, Simmons; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to do more outreach to residents, businesses, and property owners to communicate the drought status and take all measures to reduce nonessential water use citywide, and provide a report on citywide water usage and water supply. Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Wilson Absent)
Water conservation is good, but we are in a far better position now than we were just a few months ago. In fact, our Stony Brook Reservoir is now overflowing, and the level of the Hobbs Basin (a.k.a. Cambridge Reservoir) is much higher now.
Stony Brook Reservoir overflowing into the Charles River - March 12, 2025
Order #6. That the Human Services and Veterans Committee hold a meeting to discuss Sex Work and Sex Trafficking. Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, McGovern, Toner; Order Adopted 9-0
Regardless of any positive aspects of such a discussion, this is quite clearly a move by some councillors - most notably Sobrinho-Wheeler and Siddiqui - to capitalize politically on the current misdemeanor charge involving Councillor Toner. Indeed, many of the people writing letters and jumping on this bandwagon have affiliations with the local Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and/or the Cambridge Residents Alliance (CResA) - though, quite frankly, it’s getting difficult to tell the difference between the two. The “outrage” is clearly well-coordinated.
For the handful of people who actually are interested in my opinion, I will simply say that I understand the difference between what city councillors do as part of their jobs and what they do outside of their jobs. I am primarily interested in the former, and I’ll leave the latter to the local tabloids and anonymous commenters. I count myself among the many people who feel that Councillor Toner has been one of our effective and collaborative city councillors. He’s also a human being.
By the way, whatever happened with this little kerfuffle of a couple of years ago? I don’t recall there being a subsequent policy order regarding the “toxic work environment” next door to the Sullivan Chamber at that time. Just imagine what that environment might have been in a “strong mayor” system. How do we feel about the fact that City-salaried City Council aides routinely work in the political campaigns of their bosses? I can recall a time when one incumbent councillor was granted nearly-free campaign headquarters space in a prominent location in obvious violation of campaign finance laws. No whistle, no foul.
It is indeed ironic that the most recent Best Motion Picture Academy Award went to the film “Anora” – while here in Cambridge some are reacting in a manner analogous to Claude Rains in “Casablanca”, “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here.” We even have a local state legislator supporting the legalization of sex work while simultaneously calling for Councillor Toner’s resignation. Let’s not forget that not so long ago a person selling marijuana might have been written off as a dope dealer, and now we have a City Council resolution congratulating a sitting member of the Cambridge School Committee on his grand opening of a cannabis dealership. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Times change. You don’t have to love all the changes, but sometimes you just have to roll with them.
Charter Right #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to renewal of the Half Crown-Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District. [Charter Right – Azeem, Mar 24, 2025] (CM25#66) [text of report]
Comments by Azeem, Toner, Nolan, Charles Sullivan (Historical Commission), Zusy; Motion by Azeem as Amended by Toner Adopted 9-0; Placed on File 9-0
As I said last week, I fear that the ABC juggernaut to bulldoze the historic fabric of Cambridge may involve objecting to any and all efforts to preserve the many historic features of our city in favor of maximum development. Councillor Azeem’s exercise of his Charter Right last week seems to confirm this. There are several communications from ABC adherents indicating their preference to discard most or all of such preservation efforts. If all you really want is A Bigger Cambridge, why let a long and rich history get in your way?
On The Table #3. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $570,000 from Free Cash to the Public Investment Fund Police Extraordinary Expenditures account for the procurement of replacement firearms for the Police Department. These funds would support the purchase of replacement firearms for the Department. Police Department firearms are typically replaced on approximately a ten-year cycle. The manufacturer has ceased production of the model currently used and replacements are almost impossible to source. It is important that department personnel are all trained on the same firearm to ensure safety and interoperability. [Tabled – Mar 17, 2025]
Removed from Table 9-0; Comments by Toner, Nolan, Azeem, CPD Commissioner Christine Elow, Yi-An Huang, Siddiqui (beholden to DSA), McGovern (who notes that he is in discussion with DSA re: homeless shelter that was cited as a false choice of guns vs. shelters - why exactly does DSA have any standing in this discussion?), JSW, Zusy, Taha Jennings, Wilson, Simmons; Order Adopted 6-3 (Nolan, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler - No); Reconsideration Fails 1-8 (Nolan - Yes)
On The Table #4. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $160,000 from Free Cash to the Public Investment Fund Police Extraordinary Expenditures account for the procurement of a new fully electric accessible transport wagon. This funding will allow the purchase of a fully electric, American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant transport wagon to replace one of the aging F350s. The new vehicle will ensure the safe and comfortable transport of community members to court, shelters, and other service providers. [Tabled – Mar 17, 2025]
Removed from Table 9-0; Order Adopted 9-0; Reconsideration Fails 0-9
Though these will likely be approved after the recent delay and corresponding Finance Committee hearing last week, I allow myself to be entertained by the many ways Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler (DSA) tap-dances his way through the many ways to say “Defund The Police” without explicitly saying “defund the police”. He apparently also believes in disarming the police - as evidenced by his remarks at the recent hearing. The Ghost of Zondervan lives on.
162 Communications - mainly on (a) Garden Street, (b) “Our squares and corridors”, and (c) support for Councillor Toner.
Meanwhile, In Other News – March 24, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
With a backdrop of personal indiscretion on the part of one councillor and political opportunism by others, here are the more interesting agenda items for this week’s City Council meeting:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to recommendations for the block rates for water consumption and sewer use for the period beginning April 1, 2025 and ending March 31, 2026. (CM25#54) [text of report]
Order Adopted 9-0
Water & Sewer Block Rates: FY16 - FY26
Water & Sewer Rate Increases: FY16-FY26
Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining its AAA rating from the nation’s three major credit rating agencies. (CM25#55) [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #10. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a summary of a Planning Board Meeting on the 2024 Town Gown Reports and Presentations. (CM25#63) [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0
The only point I’ll make here is that even though many people argue that our local universities should provide housing for their undergraduate students, graduate students, and other affiliates, not everyone wants to live in university housing. Speaking personally, I never even considered it when I was a graduate student.
Manager’s Agenda #11. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a proposed Home Rule Petition prepared by the Law Department which would raise the sound business practices and written quote contract thresholds under M.G.L. c. 30B for City contracts with certified disadvantaged businesses. (CM25#64) [text of report]
Order Adopted 9-0
I continue to wonder where the line is drawn between “affirmative action” and “political patronage” - especially in regard to employment and City contracts.
Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to renewal of the Half Crown-Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District. (CM25#66) [text of report]
Charter Right - Azeem
I always love these detail-rich reports from the Cambridge Historical Commission. That said, I fear that the ABC juggernaut to bulldoze the historic fabric of Cambridge may object to any and all efforts to preserve the many historic features of our city in favor of maximum development.
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to develop a timeline for the next Incentive Zoning Nexus Study. Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Toner
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
I will be interested to see what a current analysis shows regarding the effect of recent significant increases in Linkage Fees for new development as well as the effect of our current Inclusionary Housing requirements. Politically-motivated initiatives do not generally align with economic realities, and courage among elected officials to acknowledge this is often in short supply.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Office of the Housing Liaison and all relevant departments to ensure the successful implementation of an outreach and assistance campaign to provide broad and equitable access to eviction record sealing for eligible Cambridge tenants. Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson
Order Adopted 9-0
Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to work with the School Department, the Department of Public Works, and other relevant departments to open the publicly owned parking at the King Open/Cambridge Street Upper School Complex for either residential free parking or commercial parking opportunities during “off” hours. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner
Order Adopted 9-0
I interpret this Order as yet another mop-up attempt to mitigate the negative effects of major road reconfigurations that dramatically reduce available parking - especially on and near commercial and residential “corridors”.
Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments and institutional stakeholders currently operating some form of shuttle to explore options for a municipal transit pilot program. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toner, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zusy
Order Adopted 9-0
73 Communications - mostly requesting that the City Council exercise restraint in any proposals to rezone “our squares and corridors”.
Resolution #5. Condolences on the death of Gladys “Pebble” Gifford. Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan
Committee Report #1. The Health and Environment Committee held a public hearing on Mon, Feb 24, 2025 to review and discuss the launch of the Cambridge Net Zero Transportation Plan (NZTP). [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Committee Report #2. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Tues, Feb 25, 2025 to discuss tenant-paid broker fees and other housing fees and the options that the city and state government have to regulate them. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Committee Report #3. The Finance Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Feb 26, 2025 to review and discuss the City Council priorities and goals and discuss how these will shape and be incorporated within the City budget. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Committee Report #4. The Health and Environment Committee held a public hearing on March 19, 2025 to receive an update on the amendments to the Floodplain regulations. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Evacuation Day Special - March 17, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
March 17 marks the 249th anniversary of the end of the 11-month siege of Boston that ended when the Continental Army under the command of George Washington fortified Dorchester Heights in early March 1776 with cannons captured at Ticonderoga. British General William Howe’s garrison and navy were threatened by these positions, and they were forced to decide between attack and retreat. Howe chose to retreat in order to prevent what could have been a repeat of the Battle of Bunker Hill, withdrawing from Boston to Nova Scotia on March 17, 1776. The British evacuation was Washington’s first victory of the Revolutionary War. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this event was how Henry Knox - a 25-year-old Boston bookseller-turned-artillery colonel - had returned with his men from a six-week mission to Fort Ticonderoga in New York dragging more than 119,000 pounds of firearms and ammunition, including 59 cannons. He and his men transported the load over 300 miles, through the snowy Berkshires, on 42 sleds pulled by 160 oxen. [Ref: WBUR newsletter] In contrast, many of the people of Boston today use this day as an opportunity to drink and get wasted.
Meanwhile, across the River Charles, we have these agenda items on tap for this week’s City Council meeting:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the 2025 Annual Surveillance Report concerning City Departments’ use of Surveillance Technology or Surveillance Data. (CM25#33) [text of report]
pulled by Toner (w/M7,M8); comments by Nolan, Christine Elow (CPD), Mike Madeiros (CPD), Zusy, Toner, City Solicitor Megan Bayer. Overt cameras in Central Square expected to be installed 2nd week of April; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $570,000 from Free Cash to the Public Investment Fund Police Extraordinary Expenditures account for the procurement of replacement firearms for the Police Department. These funds would support the purchase of replacement firearms for the Department. Police Department firearms are typically replaced on approximately a ten-year cycle. The manufacturer has ceased production of the model currently used and replacements are almost impossible to source. It is important that department personnel are all trained on the same firearm to ensure safety and interoperability. (CM25#40) [text of report]
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Christine Elow (CPD), Sobrinho-Wheeler (DSA), Zusy, Jim Mulcahy (CPD), Casey McGrath (CPD), Wilson, Manisha ?? (CPD), Simmons, City Manager Yi-An Huang, McGovern; Tabled and Referred to Finance Committee 7-2 (PT,DS-No)
Note: This agenda item was the focus during Public Comment by many of the characters from the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) who used this as an opportunity to express their hatred for police and to suggest a false choice between this appropriation and funding for homeless shelters, etc. Nonetheless, some city councillors chose to validate this false choice during their comments – and pushback from the City Administration was, at best, weak.
Manager’s Agenda #8. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $160,000 from Free Cash to the Public Investment Fund Police Extraordinary Expenditures account for the procurement of a new fully electric accessible transport wagon. This funding will allow the purchase of a fully electric, American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant transport wagon to replace one of the aging F350s. The new vehicle will ensure the safe and comfortable transport of community members to court, shelters, and other service providers. (CM25#41) [text of report]
pulled by Toner; comments by Wilson, Toner, Nolan; Tabled and Referred to Finance Committee 5-3-1 (BA,PT,DS-No; JSW-Absent)
Committee Report #2. The Public Safety Committee held a public hearing on Mar 3, 2025 to review and discuss the City Manager’s Surveillance Technology Impact Report (STIR) related to allowing Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle (RPA) technology in Cambridge. [text of report]
Late Order #4. That the City Manager provide the Council with a report before May 31, 2025, that includes a summary of all requests for approval of Surveillance Technology Impact Reports received by the city council during the prior year pursuant to Section 2.128.030 or Section 2.128.040 of the Surveillance Ordinance, including whether the City Council approved, disapproved, or required modifications to the Surveillance Technology Impact Reports received, for the Council to review and adopt. (PO25#34) Councillor Toner
Order Adopted 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update regarding Federal funding.
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang, Placed on File 7-0-2 (voice vote)
Manager’s Agenda #9. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $30,000,000 from Free Cash to the Debt Stabilization Fund. This appropriation will be used to mitigate anticipated debt service costs in future years for the City’s major capital projects.
pulled by Nolan; comments by Zusy; Order Adopted 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #16. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number #24-62, regarding an update on recommendations and planned next steps from the City’s study of resident experiences of inclusion and bias in Inclusionary Housing in Cambridge. [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #17. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to PO24#162, regarding proposed amendments to the Cannabis Business Ordinance to add select HCA requirements so the city can waive the HCA requirement and zoning amendment to remove repackaging prohibition. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-0-1 (JSW-Absent); Adopt Amendment re: repackaging 8-0-1 (JSW Absent); refer Petition Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-1 (JSW Absent); Placed Communication on File 8-0-1 (JSW Absent)
A. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Chapter 5.50 CANNABIS BUSINESS PERMITTING. (ORD25#5)
Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-0-1 (JSW-Absent)B. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, relative to Zoning Petition to remove the repackaging prohibition as a City Council Zoning Petition. (ORD25#6)
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-1 (JSW-Absent)
Manager’s Agenda #18. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments of members to the Cambridge Kiosk Advisory Committee.
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy on Out-Of-Town News; comments by Simmons re: hope that Somerville-based Culture House (who will curate Kiosk) will respect Cambridge history and context; additional comments by Melissa Peters (CDD); Appointments Confirmed 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #19. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to PO25#16, regarding permissible height increases under the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) in the Zoning Ordinance. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, McGovern, Nolan, Zusy; apparently AHO projects will be capped at “only” 9 stories on “neighborhood streets”, but greater AHO heights to remain on “AHO corridors”; McGovern doesn’t want to touch AHO believing “it’s working fine”; Language Adopted as a City Council Zoning Petition 8-0-0-1 (Zusy-Present); Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-0-1 (Zusy-Present); Placed on File 9-0
A. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, relative to amend certain subsections of the Affordable Housing Overlay, Section 11.207 of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance. (ORD25#7)
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-0-1 (Zusy-Present)
Manager’s Agenda #20. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number #24-58, regarding the feasibility of a successor program to Rise Up Cambridge. (CM25#53) [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui; McGovern, Wilson to schedule a Human Services Committee hearing on this (Apr 15, 3-5pm); comments by Siddiqui, Azeem, Toner, Nolan, Zusy, Wilson; Referred to Human Services & Veterans Committee 9-0
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to appoint the members of a working committee tasked with integrating the objectives of both the Task Force to Examine the Status and Wellbeing of the City’s African American/Black Population and the Commission on the Status of Black Men and Boys into a unified, actionable framework. Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by JSW, Wilson, Simmons, Nolan; Order Adopted, Referred to Civic Unity Committee 9-0
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City departments to draft language to create an Ordinance to ensure that vacant store fronts and commercial properties keep their properties in safe and clean conditions. Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Nolan, McGovern, Siddiqui; Add Siddiqui, Wilson as sponsors; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Order #3. Designating the Fourth Thursday of March as Tuskegee Airmen Commemoration Day. Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson
Order Adopted 9-0
Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant staff to present a zoning petition to the City Council for consideration on maximum unit size. [Charter Right – Toner, Mar 3, 2025]
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Applications & Petitions #1. A Zoning Amendment Petition has been received from Mushla Marasao in regards to Article 5.28.21, 8.22.1, 8.22.2, Tbl 5.1. (AP25#11) [text of petition]
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-1 (Wilson-Absent)
Applications & Petitions #4. A Zoning Amendment Petition has been received from BMR-320 Charles LLC c/o BioMed Realty, L. P., regarding a Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City of Cambridge, which, upon adoption would create a new East Cambridge Community Enhancement Overlay District, or the “ECCE Overlay District”. (AP25#14) [text of petition]
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 8-0-1 (Wilson-Absent)
Committee Report #1. The Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review met on Mon, Dec 9, 2024; Mon, Jan 27, 2025; Thurs, Feb 13, 2025; and Mon, Feb 24, 2025, to discuss the recommendations made by the Charter Review Committee and other Charter related suggestions made by Councillors. The Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review voted on several recommendations made by the Charter Review Committee and by Councillors. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from City Solicitor Megan B. Bayer, transmitting City Charter – Update Regarding Alternative Mayoral Selection Proposals and Other Updates. [text of report]
Referred to Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review 9-0
Late Order #5. That the City Council approve the motions that passed favorably in the Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review. Committee Report is attached. (PO25#35) Councillor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0
Just Another Manic Monday – March 3, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
Note: Earlier in the day (10am) there was a Special City Council meeting at which the City Manager’s contract was extended for another four years.
Most of the Public Comment was in regard to Order #2 (see below).
Here are the items that grabbed my attention:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update regarding Federal funding.
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang, comparable to impact of Covid, incredible harm expected grants reduced or eliminated, hiring freezes and reductions at universities, reduced graduate student admissions, firing of federal workers, Cambridge currently receives ~$23 million annually in federal funding ($9-10 millions to DHSP, $7 million to schools, $6 million to CDD), many Cambridge-based institutions affected (e.g. housing subsidies, Cambridge Housing Authority), immediate cuts currently paused, main impacts expected in FY26, scale of cuts impossible for City of Cambridge and State to backfill, how to stabilize to degree possible, possibility of stabilization funding; JSW asks about legal liabilities; some things now in court, unclear how things will end up, other federal obstructions; Nolan comments; Owen O’Riordan on possible loss of CDBG funding; McGovern, Simmons, Wilson, Zusy, Siddiqui comments; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on Supplier Diversity. [text of report]
pulled by Wilson; comments by Wilson, Pardis Saffari (CDD), another woman (Liz), Owen O’Riordan, McGovern; Placed on File 8-0-1 (DS-Absent)
Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of David Freilach, Rachel Dowley Alexander, and Chris Herlich as members and the reappointment of Kai Alexis Smith as a member of the Public Art Commission for a term of three years.
Appointments Approved 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-63 regarding recognizing and honoring the Massachusett Tribe. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to changes in the Clerk Department ordinance regarding a fee increase. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, City Clerk Diane LeBlanc, Taha Jennings, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Zusy; Passed to 2nd Reading 8-0-1 (DS-Absent)
Supplemental City Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a request to move to Executive Session to discuss the purchase of real property, off Cambridge/Concord Turnpike in Lincoln, Massachusetts, near the Hobbs Brook Reservoir. Discussing this matter in an open session may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the City.
Moved to Executive Session 8-0-1 (Siddiqui-Absent); Placed on File 9-0
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to explore potential actions the City can take to mitigate the impact of Eversource price hikes. Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, -Simmons, Nolan, Wilson, Zusy; Simmons amendment re: scheduling meeting, adding Wilson as sponsor; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Order #2. That the City Council go on record reaffirming that Cambridge is a Sanctuary City not only for immigrants but also for all marginalized communities, including transgender and nonbinary individuals. Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled by McGovern; Wilson, Zusy, Nolan, Siddiqui added as sponsors 9-0; comments by McGovern, Nolan, Wilson, Simmons; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0 (Siddiqui-Absent)
Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to coordinate with the MBTA in finding ways in which to strengthen safety measures. Mayor Simmons, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy, Simmons, Nolan, Wilson; Zusy amendment adopted 7-0-2 (JSW,SS-Absent); additional comments by Simmons; Order Adopted as Amended 7-0-2 (JSW,SS-Absent)
Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with all appropriate Departments to develop language to create an “Affordable Rent Incentive Program” program for Cambridge and to report back to the City Council with option, including the percentage of possible tax abatements. Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy
pulled by McGovern; comments by McGovern; Nolan notes that state enabling legislation was passed in 2023, notes distinction between “naturally occurring affordable housing” vs. deed-restricted affordable housing, program would only apply to rentals to income-qualified tenants; Zusy asks about impact on tax levy, meaning of “percentage of possible tax abatements”; McGovern suggests that average 1BR rent is $3000 (questionable - perhaps advertised rents rather than actual average rent), suggests limiting this only to early applicants; Zusy suggests doing this as a pilot, suggests that “this is the way we’re really going to solve the housing crisis”; Wilson, Azeem (will apply to relatively few units), McGovern comments; add everyone as sponsors 8-0-1 (SS-Absent); Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (SS-Absent)
Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to commit to prioritizing snow removal from crosswalks and pedestrian islands for the rest of this and future snow seasons and direct appropriate City staff to generate a policy for prioritizing snow removal from crosswalks and pedestrian islands after snow storms. Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Sobrinho-Wheeler (wants City to clear snow from all sidewalks); JSW amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (SS-Absent); add Simmons as sponsor Adopted 8-0-1 (SS-Absent); Nolan comments on need for property owners to clear sidewalks, community responsibilities; Zusy comments re: asking too much of DPW in a difficult weather situation; Wilson comments re: small business owners; McGovern comments on assisting business associations and CSBID; Simmons comments on bike lanes being cleared by putting snow onto sidewalks, difficulties for seniors; Order Adopted 7-0-1-1 (SS-Absent, CZ-Present)
Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department to draft a home rule petition allowing Cambridge to end the practice of property owners passing on broker’s fees to tenants. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner (will vote NO - it’s a private business relationship), Sobrinho-Wheeler (vouchers don’t cover broker’s fees) naively suggests that landlords won’t pass cost onto tenants; add Nolan as sponsor 8-0-1 (SS-Absent); Zusy notes that fees will surely be passed onto tenants in form of higher rent; Nolan naively suggests this will not increase rent; Azeem incorrectly asserts that voucher-holders won’t have to pay added rent caused by factoring brokers fee into rent; Order Adopted as Amended 7-1-1 (Toner-No, Siddiqui-Absent)
Order #9. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant staff to present a zoning petition to the City Council for consideration on maximum unit size. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Toner; Toner questions legality of this, notes that City Solicitor unsure of legality; Charter Right - Toner
Order #10. That the City Council go on record in support of HD.2996/SD.1305 An Act to Regulate Junk Fees in Housing and HD.238/SD.35 An Act Eliminating Forced Broker’s Fees. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner (will vote NO); Order Adopted 7-1-1 (Toner-No, Siddiqui-Absent)
Order #13. The City Manager is requested to work with relevant departments to create a plaque to be placed at the entrance of or inside City Hall that demonstrates the values that the Cambridge City Council upholds of the separation of church and state and gender equality. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Zusy - notes that inscription dates to another era and anyone looking at it would recognize this, offers modern interpretation, suggests that few people read this inscription or the plaques within City Hall, notes their content, suggests explanations unneeded; Nolan explains origins of this policy order, noting that enhancement made inscription more visible, suggests that she and Siddiqui found it to be unwelcoming and non-inclusive, had two high school students draft this order, offers irrelevant historical context, Nolan offended by word “men”, says some people would prefer to take inscription down; McGovern notes that values and sense of what is acceptable changes over time; Simmons notes that first woman honored in City Hall was Margaret Fuller, then Barbara Ackermann, portraits in Ackermann are now all women who have served in office, plaque for Clorae Evereteze in stairwell, notes role of committee looking into markers and memorials and issue of George Washington owning slaves and memorialized on Cambridge Common but balanced by Prince Hall monument; add Simmons as sponsor 8-0-1 (SS-Absent); Zusy notes clutter in front of City Hall, suggests having young people giving tours, notes that there is an important message captured in the inscription; Order Adopted as Amended 7-1-1 (Zusy-No, Siddiqui-Absent)
[Note: Perhaps it should be noted that City Hall was donated by Frederick Hastings Rindge who also authored the inscription.]
294 Communications - mainly from the previous regular meeting re: either municipal broadband (pro and con) and the citywide upzoning (pro and con).
Committee Report #1. The Health and Environment Committee held a public hearing on February 11, 2025 to review and discuss the update to the Cambridge Net Zero Action Plan (NZAP) Annual Report. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (SS-Absent)
Mon, Feb 24
1:30pm The Special Committee of the Whole will hold a public meeting to resume the review and discussion of recommendations from the Charter Review Committee and any additional suggestions from the full City Council pertaining to the Cambridge City Charter. This is a continuation of the public hearing that began on Dec 9, 2024, that reconvened and recessed again on Jan 27, 2025, and reconvened and recessed again on Feb 13, 2024. (Sullivan Chamber and Zoom) [Agenda (contains red-lined DRAFT of proposed Charter)
Thurs, Feb 13 - Special Committee of the Whole
3:00pm The Special Committee of the Whole will hold a public meeting to resume the review and discussion of recommendations from the Charter Review Committee and any additional suggestions from the full City Council pertaining to the Cambridge City Charter. This is a continuation of the public hearing that began on Dec 9, 2024, that reconvened and recessed again on Jan 27, 2025. (Sullivan Chamber and Zoom) [Agenda & Attachments]
This meeting primarily focused on several proposed alternatives for the election of the mayor with the consensus being that this should best be left to the City Council Rules rather than be enshrined in the City Charter. They did not discuss several alternate proposals involving City Council taking greater control of the City Budget process and the matter of whether or not the City Solicitor should be appointed by the City Council or if the city manager’s chosen city solicitor should be subject to City Council approval or removal. There will be another meeting on February 24. It is also expected that the Law Department will very soon make available a marked-up draft of a proposed City Charter based on votes taken to date. - RW
The Other Shoe Drops - February 10, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
It should be noted that this Regular City Council meeting will be preceded by a 3:00pm Special Meeting relating to negotiations to extend the contract of City Manager Yi-An Huang. Public comment will permitted at that meeting prior to going into Executive Session.
The Big Items (other than any developments on the City Manager’s contract) are the inevitable ordination of the ill-begotten Multi-Family Housing zoning (better characterized as the Gargantuan Upzoning Amendment) and an Order to move ahead on Municipal Broadband - regardless of cost.
Here are the items on the Regular Meeting that drew my attention this week:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Cambridge Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan final adoption. (CM25#26) [text of report and Order]
Order Adopted, Placed on File 9-0
Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to create a plan with a schedule and milestones to move forward with the creation of a Municipal Broadband Network and present it for consideration by the Council at a Finance Committee meeting in the context of capital projects for coming years. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by JSW dismissing concerns about feasibility claiming much consultation with City officials; Nolan notes that service would not be free, says this Order in not a mandate to move forward, notes importance of net neutrality, says this is a necessary utility, calls it a manageable investment; Toner notes opposition due to range of “Whereas” statements, $150-250 million cost and changing technologies, other ways to address Internet equity; McGovern says he has been supportive of this, but notes different financial circumstances now, refers to “Trump-Musk administration” and federal cuts, proposes amendment to strike to “to move forward to the creation…” clause; Zusy concurs re: current financial circumstances, notes other ways digital equity is being addressed; Siddiqui OK with amendment; Wilson says conversation is important; Simmons says affordable Internet now not a luxury but a necessity, need for greater digital equity, notes that proposal doesn’t assure lower cost; McGovern amendment to remove “to move forward” Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (Toner-No)
Though I have no strong feelings on Municipal Broadband, I am aware of the significant costs associated with it as well as the risks and uncertainty of moving forward on an infrastructure proposal in an environment where emerging technologies may make this obsolete. I am also reminded of the various meetings and presentations on the tax levy over the last year and the repeated advice that the City needs to be more fiscally prudent in the near term. Perhaps Councillors Sobrinho-Wheeler, Siddiqui, Nolan, and Wilson didn’t get the memo. Or maybe this is being introduced strategically right now as the City Manager’s contract extension is being negotiated. Or maybe it’s just another municipal election year bauble to be dangled in front of the electorate even though there is little or no indication that this will yield any cost savings for consumers. For the record, I deeply dislike Comcast/Xfinity - but mainly because of the crappy Cable TV options which, by the way, never enter into the discussions about Municipal Broadband.
Unfinished Business #1. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Ordinance 2025 #1 Multi-family Zoning Petition-Part 1. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Amended Feb 3, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025; Expires Feb 17, 2025] (ORD25#1) [Final Version as Ordained]
pulled by Azeem; Azeem amendment to footnote as suggested by CDD staff Adopted 9-0; McGovern amendment re: required abutters meeting that would have required notification to Planning Boards in adjacent towns (not viewable in recording of meeting); Nolan comments on electronic notification; McGovern amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (Toner-Absent); Zusy comments on this proposal producing most luxury units, raised real estate values, displacement, and other negative outcomes, suggests delaying this or reconsidering “3+3” alternative and establish funding mechanisms, community land trust; Azeem praises himself and Siddiqui; Siddiqui calls this her “birthday present”, suggests even more aggressive changes and “being intentional”, dismisses concerns of others as “fear of change”; McGovern addresses concern about “luxury units” and that target population is people who make too much money to be eligible for Inclusionary Housing units, calls this “good government”; Toner concurs and acknowledges that many people will be upset with his vote in favor, dismisses concerns about over-building on small lots, wants to now move forward on Squares and Corridors; Wilson emphasizes “crisis”, says she preferred “3+3” alternative; Nolan credits herself for initializing process for eliminating single-family zoning, says she preferred “3+3” alternative claiming it would have yielded more units and more affordability; Sobrinho-Wheeler notes that all current single-family housing sell for at least $1.5 million, says this change will yield 60% of all new buildings having affordable units; Simmons notes long process and suggests this will yield affordability for generations, says “leadership means making difficult choices”, says Squares and Corridors, housing vouchers next targets, says “we are a role model”; Petition Ordained as Amended 8-1 (Zusy-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9
Unfinished Business #2. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to ORDINANCE 2025 #2 Multi-family Zoning Petition-Part 2. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025; Expires Feb 17, 2025] (ORD25#2) [Final Version as Ordained]
pulled by Azeem; Petition Ordained as Amended 8-1 (Zusy-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9
Late Order #6. That the City Manager direct the Community Development Department and Law Department to draft an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would make the provisions of Section 11.207.5.2.1, Paragraph (e), which allow qualified increases in building height under the Affordable Housing Overlay, not applicable in the Residence C-1 district. Councillor Toner
Late Order Adopted 9-0
Other than the allowance of multi-family housing in all residential districts (which is not controversial), I think this gargantuan zoning change is a huge mistake. The existence of varying heights and densities in different parts of Cambridge is a feature - not a bug. I am also acutely aware of the value of setbacks and access - especially in regard to fire safety. Sometimes I think some of our city councillors are just robots created as part of an MIT project – programmed to solve some maximum packing problem set with no sense of aesthetics, liveability, or community. Meanwhile, the activists promise benefits like cheaper rents and lower costs that will most likely never be realized - at least not as a result of these zoning changes. Sometimes the call of “crisis” is just a tool to ram things through - both nationally and locally.
Committee Report #1. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee held a public hearing on Jan 28, 2025 to discuss inter-jurisdictional projects that are in play that may impact mobility in Cambridge. The discussion was focused on the Community Development Department’s report of Nov 14, 2024 to the City Council, Awaiting Report 24-36. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
I attended this meeting primarily to alert the councillors (at least those who actually listen) to some alternative approaches to pedestrian and bicycle-friendly crossings of the Charles River.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with appropriate departments to prepare a communication to DCR Commissioner Arrigo, urging that a study of traffic conditions at the intersections of Western Avenue and River Street at Memorial Drive and Soldiers Field Road (commonly referred to as “the box”), be included in their FY26 Capital Plan. Councillor Zusy, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0
This was one of the priorities discussed at the above meeting. Many of the current crop of activists only see merit in lane reductions and obstructions that make automobile use as difficult as possible. Reality sometimes has to intervene. - RW
Trumping History - February 3, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
Barring divine intervention, the ordination of The Bigger Cambridge Zoning is expected to happen next week (Feb 10) after being passed to a 2nd Reading at last week’s meeting. Having experienced a building fire this past Thursday just 10 feet from my house on Broadway, I have never felt the need for space between buildings more than I do right now. Urban planning in Cambridge is being steadily eclipsed by the urge to pack everything closer and stack everything higher. On the bright side, I suspect more than a few residents who rarely vote in local elections may have a change of heart this year now that new building heights and densities may soon be doubling or tripling in their neighborhoods.
Last week the second meeting of the “Special Committee of the Whole” looked at some of the more fringy proposals from some of the more fringy councillors. They dropped the proposal to double City Council terms from 2 years to 4 years when they heard some of the negative aspects that they should have understood all along had they been actually paying attention. The proposal to expand City Council authority in the City Budget process was soundly bashed by City staff, but its chief advocate (Sobrinho-Wheeler, DSA-Cambridge) chose to strategically withdraw it for possible revision rather than see it go down in flames. The proposal to have Department Head appointments be subject to City Council approval was mercifully put to sleep, but there will be another meeting on Feb 13 to continue discussion of some of the other problematic proposals. What they do after that is anyone’s guess, but I hope they will at least take a second look at the mechanisms for citizen redress as well as what appears to be a drastically watered down version of the Plan E prohibition of city councillors going around the city manager to direct or pressure City staff.
As for this week’s meeting, here are some things of possible interest:
Manager’s Agenda #1, #2, #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Surveillance Technology Impact Report (STIR). [#1 - Automated License Plate Recognition; #2 - Locked Cellular Device Access Software; #3 - Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle] (CM25#9)
pulled by Toner noting that these have already been through Public Safety Committee; Police Commissioner Christine Elow, Dept. Supt. John Boyle explain; Toner notes how drones may have been helpful in Faisal case, asks about circumstances when information gathered might be shared outside CPD; Boyle explains; Toner highlights unsolved murders and hesitancy of some people to come forward with information, trust in CPD; Zusy concurs with Toner, asks about use of surveillance in LA and in NYC, concerns about federal overreach; Elow explains how we have been at a deficit w/o these technologies, need to ask community with cameras, agrees that timing couldn’t be worse with new administration; City Solicitor Megan Bayer notes how policy is to protect residents in line with Welcoming City Ordinance; Yi-An Huang notes when it is appropriate to work with federal agencies in criminal investigations; Zusy asks about use of technologies to monitor protests; Boyle emphasizes that these would not be used to restrict speech but to monitor effects on traffic; Azeem comments, especially re: sharing of information; Megan Bayer explains about license plate recording and redaction of information; Azeem asks about “Proud Boys” illustration (suggesting that he would be OK with sharing info on some organizations but not others) and about joint investigation of extremist groups; Elow notes need for probable cause; Huang objects to these hypotheticals; McGovern notes that as a privileged white male he would not be subject to surveillance; Sobrinho-Wheeler says that only concept of surveillance was discussed at Public Safety Committee, wants to refer all 3 reports to Public Safety for further discussion; Huang notes uncertain times but says drone footage not high priority, real priority in keeping community safe; Wilson notes loss of friends to gun violence and how some technology might have been helpful in solving these crimes; Wilson motion to accept reports on license plate identification and cell phone data access; Siddiqui objects to Wilson motions, suggests that technology use overly broad, objects to use of drones; Nolan has concerns about drones, wants ACLU in conversation; Elow offers example of how technology would be used; Simmons offers additional explanation; Huang notes use of license plate readers to capture places in and out of the city; Nolan questions re: access to phones; Simmons notes Charlene Moore, Anthony Clay, Xavier Louis-Jacques murders and difficulty in bringing murder charges, reality that cameras and other technologies are already all around us, disproportionate effect of violence on Black and Brown communities and need to bring those most affected into conversation; Motion to approve license plate readers, cell phones access and to refer use of drones to Public Safety Committee Adopted 6-3 (BA,MM,PT,AW,CZ,DS - Yes; PN,SS,JSW - No)
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-69 regarding asbestos concerns with the MBTA’s Alewife construction. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins, Zusy, Sam Lipson (Senior Director of Environmental Health); Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $65,000 to be allocated to the Grant Fund Public Celebrations Other Ordinary Maintenance Account. This grant will support activities focused on the themes of revolution and independence, celebrating the significant historical milestones that have taken place in Cambridge.
Order Adopted 9-0
“This grant will support activities focused on the themes of revolution and independence, celebrating the significant historical milestones that have taken place in Cambridge.” … “Events will take place from April through June 2025, with a marketing campaign beginning in February.”
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of members of the Broadway Street Safety Improvement Project Working Group.
pulled by Zusy - notes timing of these appointments after most conclusions already made, imbalance of appointments tilted toward cycling advocates; Jeff Parenti (TPT) says Cycling Safety Ordinance dictates most except for finer details, esp. use of side streets to make up for loss of parking (which is beyond ridiculous from point of view of resident parking); Parenti deflects concerns about representativeness of the committee; Zusy suggests there should have been a commercial representative on the committee, lot of concern from residents about loss of parking, asks about use of parking lots (which is essentially irrelevant for Broadway); Owen O’Riordan notes recent amendments to TPDM ordinance; Wilson asks how many applications were received (over 30), also has concerns about representativeness of the appointments; Parenti says you don’t want too few or too many people on the committee; Wilson wants to hear from all people; Toner suggests mailing to all property owners w/parking lots (which is a deflection and fails to not potential exorbitant cost); Nolan notes limitations on what the committee can affect (the implication being that there will be no changes to the CSO); Appointments Approved, Placed on File 9-0
First, it’s just “Broadway”, not “Broadway Street”. We’ll see how this advisory process goes, but what many residents of Mid-Cambridge really want is to simply remove Broadway from the list of streets to be reconfigured in this manner, and that tide is rising.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to prepare a report on the use of M.G.L. Ch. 40U to determine which local statutes can be enforced by the local-option procedure in order to better collect fines in violation of Cambridge ordinances and provide a recommendation to the City Council for implementation of Ch. 40U procedures. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toner, Councillor Zusy
Order Adopted 9-0
Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to install “Bicycles Must Yield” signs along the Linear Park Parkway, Russell Field, Cambridge Commons, and any other shared use pathway determined appropriate by the City Manager and staff. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Jan 27, 2025]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler w/concerns about staff capacity and who would be putting up/removing (A-frame) signs; Jeff Parenti would prefer to not deal with these and to use only fixed metal signs (Share the Path; Keep Right); Toner, Nolan, Zusy, Wilson supportive of improved signage; Azeem asks what exactly would change; Owen O’Riordan explains; Order Adopted 8-1 (JSW-No)
Charter Right #2. Condolences to the family of Janet Rose. [Charter Right – Simmons, Jan 27, 2025]
Resolution Adopted as Amended by Substitution 9-0
Charter Right #3. That the City Council Amend Petition One, Section 5.40, Footnote (2) to add paragraph (c) to read: (c) If the building does not require a Planning Board Advisory Consultation per Section 19.40 of this Zoning Ordinance and does not require any special permit from the Planning Board, then before applying for a building permit, the applicant shall schedule an in-person or virtual meeting to answer questions and gather feedback from abutters and shall prepare a notification including, at a minimum, a general description of the project, the date, time, location, and other information necessary for people to attend the meeting, and contact information (telephone and e-mail, at minimum) for the developer and shall provide that notification by mail to abutters, owners of land directly opposite on any public or private street or way, and abutters to the abutters within three hundred feet of the property line of the lot, and to others whom the applicant may choose to contact, and shall include with the building permit application a copy of the notification and mailing list, a summary of the meeting, who attended, and what questions and feedback were received. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Jan 27, 2025] [amended text]
taken up with Unfinished Business #4; McGovern comments, motion to amend by substitution; Nolan also proposes amendment; comments by Jeff Roberts (CDD); Zusy suggests that is neighborhood associations can do hybrid meetings then developers should also be able to do so; Simmons, Toner, Wilson comments - keep it simple; Nolan amendment Adopted 9-0; Megan Bayer clarifies language; Simmons comments; Sobrinho-Wheeler amendment to allow online notifications Adopted 9-0; Megan Bayer notes that this amendment is a new footnote to proposed ordinance; City Clerk LeBlanc clarifies votes; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0; Additional Amendment to add footnote #37 and to strike previous amendment 9-0; Zusy asks about proposal change 75' height to 74' height in Res. C-1 districts (due to AHO concerns) and to have 40% open space requirement (up from 30%), at least half permeable, for buildings over 75,000 sq ft; Toner seeks examples of where these apply; Jeff Roberts, Melissa Peters explain; JSW concerned about how this might affect unit count; Simmons withdraws this for now.
Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Ordinance 2025 #1 Multifamily Zoning Petition-Part 1. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025] (ORD25#1) [amended text]
taken up with Charter Right #3; Amended 9-0
The general trend with recent City Councils is to limit most neighborhood and abutter feedback on development proposals and, in the case of the AHO to eliminate or greatly limit the roles of the Planning Board and BZA. They see the book “Neighborhood Defenders” as the last word and that all feedback is inherently NIMBYism. My sense is that if Sobrinho-Wheeler and several others could have their way, the only permissible objections would be from renters.
205 Communications: 73 pro-upzoning, 106 opposed, 15 for the “3+3” alternative (Councillor Wilson commented last week that “the community” supports the “3+3” proposal - based on what exactly?), and 11 others on various topics.
Resolution #4. Congratulations to Robyn Culbertson on the occasion of her retirement as Executive Director of the Office for Tourism. Mayor Simmons
Committee Report #1. The Finance Committee and Housing Committee held a joint public hearing on July 10, 2024 to review and discuss the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust and to discuss the City’s relationship with the Trust, consider funding priorities, and ways to fund affordable housing development in Cambridge. [text of report]
Comments by Nolan - meeting recessed, now closed, possible future meetings on topic; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like Flushing - January 27, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
In the spirit of issuing problematic Executive Orders by the bushel, our intrepid city councillors are expected to move The Bigger Cambridge Zoning forward this week en route to a swift ordination in mid-February. Hey, a 5 foot-wide backyard is plenty, right? Only a capitalist NIMBY could possibly want more. So feel free to shout “Urban Renewal!” from the rooftops, but you had better yell loudly so that they can hear you down at ground level. I also encountered this week a proponent of A Bigger Cambridge who publicly declared that only people with driveways should be allowed to own cars in Cambridge. You can’t make this stuff up.
There is also a Special City Council meeting at 4:00pm to discuss strategy in preparation for negotiations with the City Manager relative to his contract. Perhaps most importantly, there is an 11:00am Monday meeting of the “Special Committee of the Whole”, i.e. all 9 councillors, to take up some of the more problematic suggestions for Charter changes proposed by some of its more radical members. There are also rumors of a possible ballot question campaign from Cambridge’s most problematic clown-car (DSA or “Democratic Socialists of America” - Cambridge Chapter) to throw out Cambridge’s Council-Manager form of government in favor of a strongman (or strongwoman or strongsomething) form of local government. Should the ballot question materialize, there is little doubt that it would be paired with the City Council campaigns of one or more socialist candidates in search of a Big Issue. Perhaps someone named Stalin or Castro will throw his hat in the ring. Then again, perhaps a couple more incumbents will hop in the clown-car.
On the matter of the proposed Cambridge Charter, I noticed that the current draft lacks at least two notable provisions that have been a part of the Plan E Charter since it was adopted in 1940: (1) the provision for citizen-initiated referendums and initiative petitions, and (b) the felony prohibition of councillors from going past the City Manager to pressure City department heads and other employees. These are Very Large Omissions.
Meanwhile, the Regular 5:30pm Meeting of the Ringwraiths has these notable agenda items:
Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments and reappointments of members to the Transit Advisory Committee. [The official report notes 14 new appointees, but there are actually 16, in addition to the 8 reappointments.]
pulled by Nolan who states that women underrepresented in these appointments; Simmons concurs; Yi-An Huang notes limitations of the applicant pool; Appointments Approved, Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to PO24#154, regarding the City’s Sanctuary/Trust Act City status, the protections provided by the 2020 Welcoming Community Ordinance, and the importance of ensuring non-citizens are treated with dignity and respect. (CM25#14) [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by Siddiqui, Carolina Almonte (Comm. on Immigrant Rights & Citizenship), Simmons, McGovern, Toner (asks what may be coming), Yi-An Huang, Megan Bayer (Law Department), Sobrinho-Wheeler, Nolan (notes possibility of loss of federal funding), Simmons, McGovern (on what City cannot do), Wilson; Placed on File 9-0
When the Feds descend on Cambridge (and they will), this will likely be The Big Story.
Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on negotiations with Harvard University regarding PILOT payments.
pulled by Toner; updates by Yi-An Huang (50 year agreement in 2004, City option to terminate at end of 20 years, 1 year extension in Sept 2023, expired at end of 2024), Harvard now negotiating in good faith, many changes over 20 years, expectation of increased commitment from Harvard, proposals have been exchanged but still being negotiated, issue of how to value in-kind contributions, seek agreement by July 2025, existing agreement was $4.7 million PILOT in 2024); comments/questions by Toner (asks if we need to terminate the existing agreement); Huang notes one extension already, acknowledges risk of losing current PILOT funding, notes that it is interest of both Harvard and the City to come to an agreement; Sobrinho-Wheeler wants increased PILOT w/o counting in in-kind contributions, prefers shorter (20-year) term; Wilson asks who is involved in the negotiations, what happens if no agreement by July, status of MIT PILOT agreement (50-year agreement with no opt-out provision); Siddiqui emphasizes priorities for PILOT $ (does she want to earmark?); Azeem suggests City has leverage via zoning, I-90 project (is he suggesting quid-pro-quo?), wants more graduate student housing; Nolan says in-kind should not be valued in PILOT but also calls it critically important, also suggests that PILOT $ have earmarks for Council priorities; Zusy emphasizes graduate student housing; McGovern concerns about withholding in-kind contributions, esp. w.r.t. schools, notes that you cannot force graduate students to live on campus and rent levels in graduate student housing needs to be attractive, old Vellucci story of taking Harvard Yard by eminent domain and turning it into parking; Owen O’Riordan notes that a major sewer line goes under Widener Library; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an updated drought regulation ordinance. (CM25#16) [text of report]
pulled by Toner; Nolan comments; Mark Gallagher (Managing Director, Water Dept.) comments; Zusy comments, notes email from Nicolai Cauchy re: water levels; Simmons concerned about gender-neutral language; comments by Megan Bayer re: proposed fine schedule; Referred to Ordinance Committee 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-54, regarding a review of Curb Cut Policies. (CM25#18) [text of report]
pulled by Toner w/hope that Council can be removed from process entirely and completely a staff decision; Megan Bayer notes that there is no legal requirement for abutter feedback; Kathy Watson (DPW) notes proposed process and proposal role of City Council only an case of an appeal; Azeem agrees that there should be no City Council role, no appeal mechanism; Nolan, Sobrinho-Wheeler concur; Megan Bayer explains that the delegation of power should be done via ordinance, suggest referral to Gov’t Operations because language not yet drafted; Toner Referral to Gov’t Operations Adopted 9-0
The bottom line is that the City Council can delegate this to City departments if it wishes - similar to how the License Commission handles some matters that once were under City Council authority.
Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-31 regarding an update to the Municipal Facilities Improvement Plan (MFIP) including revised cost estimates to help inform the FY26 and ongoing capital budget priorities. (CM25#19) [text of report]
pulled by Zusy w/questions about $23.5 million for Windsor Street and status of Kennedy-Longfellow building; Owen O’Riordan that there will be no students at K-Lo next year, expect $50 million on schools over next 5 years including $10-12 million toward K-Lo building, to be part of this year’s budget hearings; First Street project (parking garage) expected; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-60 regarding federal grant funding. (CM25#20) [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui for comments; Zusy comments re: difficulties of contractors doing Cambridge projects (lay-down areas, parking challenges); comments by Chris Cotter re: off-site construction, role of MAPC; Placed on File 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #10. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to potential amendments to required setbacks for additions and alterations to existing buildings in the Multifamily Housing Zoning Petitions. (CM25#21) [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui; Committee Report #3 also taken up (9-0); Committee Report #3 Accepted, Placed on File 9-0; McGovern lays out proposed amendments and votes; on Petition #1 setback amendments for existing buildings, comments by Siddiqui, Azeem, Toner, Jeff Roberts (CDD), Amendment Adopted 9-0; on amendment re: procedures and abutter feedback for projects not requiring a special permit, comments by Sobrinho-Wheeler (wants to limit legal recourse for abutters), Megan Bayer, JSW wants to table this and replace “abutters” to “abutting homeowners and renters”, Megan Bayer explains, McGovern suggests JSW exercise his Charter Right; Nolan notes that any building permit can be challenged, notes that this only requires people to listen to feedback; Toner concurs re: right to challenge and Bayer agrees but notes new restrictions in state law to baseless challenges; Toner notes that there is no majority vote here to allow legal challenge, cautions against extending right to challenge to anyone who feels aggrieved; Charter Right by JSW on this amendment; on amendment decreasing heights from 4 to 3 stories and 6 for inclusionary projects; Wilson aligns with JSW re: DSA “3+3” proposal without any minimum land area, notes her history growing up in public housing, advocates more public housing, calls support for “3+3” “overwhelming” (which is ridiculous); JSW concurs re: “3+3” proposal, claims it would yield more market rate and subsidized housing, notes his opposition to lot size limitations, objects to suggestion to delay this, claims that of all new housing other that AHO projects only 1% is “affordable”, says these changes would provide affordable units in 60% of projects; Nolan supports “3+3” amendment even without the proposed lot size limitations, will vote to ordain this proposal; Azeem will not support “3+3” proposal “in spirit of compromise”; Toner will not support “3+3” proposal, notes that developers suggest this would only yield 3-deckers being torn down and replaced by single-family homes, notes public objection to 6-stories on all residential lots; Zusy feels MFH proposal is problematic and will not make housing more affordable, will create havoc in neighborhoods, make homeowners feel vulnerable, notes failure of similar changes in other cities, willing to support “3+3” proposal rather than “4+2” suggesting less backlash; Siddiqui comments on CDD projections, says whatever we pass is better than the status quo, housing developers OK w/“4+2”; Simmons says “4+2” language represents compromise, says CDD estimates 3500 new homes over next 15 years including 660 income-restricted homes; McGovern on “affordable housing piece”, notes rationale of doing AHO first (which sounds like a restatement of the stated ABC strategy), extols virtue of increasing inclusionary percentage to 20%, suggests that proposal primarily about middle-income housing, dismisses suggestion that 6-story buildings would appear on a tiny lot but then suggests it would happen w/o the restriction on lot size, says the “3+3” proposal would add in 15 years produce 550 more housing units and 260 more inclusionary units, says we can make up those numbers by going very tall in Squares and Corridors and even taller with AHO projects, will oppose “3+3” amendment; Zusy says some developers believe 5000 sq ft minimum requirement might not be necessary, suggests this might be rescinded when a 6-story building appears on a street with 2½ stories; Melissa Peters suggests that either option will be impactful in terms of number of units produced “in a positive direction”; Wilson comments suggesting that “the community” supports 3+3; AW,JSW “3+3” amendment Fails 4-5 (PN,JSW,AW,CZ-Yes; BA,MM,SS,PT,DS-No); Nolan comments on Squares and Corridors, etc., bemoans lack of Planning Board advice on petitions; Petition #1 Passed to 2nd Reading 8-1 (Zusy-No); Petition #2 Passed to 2nd Reading 8-1 (Zusy-No); Reconsideration of #1 and #2 Fails 0-9; Placed on File 9-0.
114 Communications - mostly taking sides on The Bigger Cambridge Zoning.
Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood & Long Term Planning Committee held a public hearing on best practices for urban planning Wed, Jan 8, 2025. The meeting will feature MIT’s Chris Zegras Department Head of the Department of Urban Studies and Planning and Professor of Mobility and Urban Planning and Jeff Levine, Associate Professor of the Practice of Economic Development & Planning and Harvard’s Maurice Cox, the Emma Bloomberg Professor in Residence of Urban Planning and Design at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. [text of report]
Committee Report #2. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Jan 8, 2025 to continue the discussion on two Multifamily Zoning petitions. [text of report] [communications]
Committee Report #3. The Ordinance Committee met on Thurs, Jan 16, 2025, at 3:00pm to continue the discussion on Multifamily Zoning Petition Part One and Multifamily Zoning Petition Part Two. [text of report] [communications]
The Council is expected to pass these to a 2nd Reading with ordination likely a couple of weeks later. Personally, I see no reason why such a substantial change is being zipped through the ordination process, but we are in one of those Progress At Any Cost moments in history - kind of like when the West End of Boston was leveled in the name of urban renewal or when Robert Moses ran roughshod over everything that Jane Jacobs defended. I guess it all comes down to your definition of “progress”, but you can count me among those who still prefers human-scale buildings and consistent scale in established neighborhoods. On the issue of the “housing crisis”, I would just remind everyone that Cambridge is not the problem – and we should not necessarily be sacrificing what is good in our city so that other cities and towns can continue to do little or nothing.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council with a update on the status and timeline for the completion of the Grand Junction Multi-use Path and how implementation between Gore Street and Little Binney could coincide with Phase 2 of the CSO implementation on Cambridge Street. Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Toner; add all councillors as sponsors; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Order #3. City Council opposition to Congressional Voter-Suppression SAVE Bill. Councillor Nolan, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0
I agree with this Order - mainly because of the burden it would place on our Election Commission and election workers. I will add that if I now had to register to vote for the first time I might run into a problem because I never got a passport and finding my birth certificate might take a Herculean effort. I do think, however, therefore I am.
Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to install “Bicycles Must Yield” signs along the Linear Park Parkway, Russell Field, Cambridge Commons, and any other shared use pathway determined appropriate by the City Manager and staff. Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; Toner, Nolan, Zusy, Sobrinho-Wheeler comments; Charter Right - Sobrinho-Wheeler
Yeah, I’m sure those signs will be scrupulously obeyed.
Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to develop zoning recommendations, pursuant to M.G.L. c.40A §9B, for regulations to encourage the use of solar energy systems and protect solar access for Registered Solar Energy Systems that have been in existence for one year, per Ordinance Ch. 22.60, specifically on structures over 4 stories. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy
pulled by Azeem; Nolan explains how this Order came about, add Wilson, Zusy as sponsors 9-0; Azeem asks for examples, Melissa Peters (CDD) responds; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
Charter Right #1. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $2,500,000, from Free Cash, to the Finance Department Other Ordinary Maintenance account ($1,500,000), and to the Finance Department Extraordinary Expenditures account ($1,000,000), to support the continued operation and needed capital and equipment improvements to Neville Center, a 5-star skilled nursing facility with 112 beds, which is part of Neville Communities Inc. [Charter Right – Nolan, Jan 6, 2025]
McGovern says “charter-written”, Nolan says “charter-wrote” (Sheesh, do they understand the English language?); Nolan goes on about financial details, concerns about high interest rate and profit by Rockland Trust, etc., wants to bifurcate vote into $1.5 million and $1 million votes; Toner asks what would happen if Council did not support this, Chair of Neville Board notes that this would make things difficult; Zusy wonders why Neville didn’t get any ARPA funds, etc.; Solicitor says it’s OK to bifurcate vote; $1.5 million appropriation from Free Cash (for debt service) Adopted 8-1 (Nolan-No); $1 million appropriation from General Fund (for capital improvements) Adopted 9-0; Reconsideration Fails 0-9.
Resolution #4. Thanks to Iram Farooq for her 25 years of commitment, service, and leadership at the City of Cambridge Community Development Department and best wishes as she joins Harvard University. Councillor Siddiqui, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson
pulled early by Siddiqui; comments by Siddiqui, Azeem, Nolan, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Toner, Zusy, Wilson, McGovern, Simmons, Yi-An Huang, Iram Farooq; all councillors added as sponsors; Adopted as Amended 9-0
Resolution #5. Condolences on the death of Robert V. Travers. Councillor Toner, Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Toner; add all councillors as sponsors; Resolution Adopted 9-0 as Amended
Resolution #6. Condolences on the death of Henry Edward (Ted) Tierney. Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern
Resolution #7. Condolences to the family of Janet Rose. Mayor Simmons
pulled by Simmons; Charter Right - Simmons (to add more details)
Meeting of the Special Committee of the Whole on the City Charter – Monday, January 27, 2025, 11:00am-1:00pm [Agenda]
I was the only person who gave public comment at the previous meeting in December. Presumably there will be others this time, but the unfortunate truth is that even though this is perhaps the single most significant matter now before this City Council, it has been flying almost completely under the radar.
This meeting features 5 additional proposed Charter changes from several city councillors, but the most interesting part of the agenda is the master class response from City Solicitor Megan Bayer that lays out with remarkable clarity the major problems with each of these proposals.
The new proposals are:
(1) give the City Council the power to increase parts of the annual budget by up to 10% compared to what is initially proposed by the City Manager
(2) City Solicitor would be appointed by the City Council
(3) Popularly elected mayor alongside a City Manager similar to Worcester
(4) 4 year (staggered) terms, with elections every 2 years
(5) Department heads appointed by the City Manager and approved by the Council
It is also worth noting, and I will likely address these during Public Comment, that:
(a) At the previous meeting of this Special Committee of the Whole, the councillors dismissed proposals for Resident Assemblies as well as proposed mechanisms for citizen-initiated referendums and initiative petitions. What they perhaps failed to realize is that citizen-initiated referendums and initiative petitions are part of our current Plan E Charter (by reference) and the apparent intention of the Charter Review Committee was to incorporate those provisions (with some changes) into the new proposed Charter. The action of the Special Committee effectively threw out an existing right to a mechanism for redress by citizens.
(b) The current Plan E Charter imposes severe penalties for Interference by City Council:
Section 107. Neither the city council nor any of its committees or members shall direct or request the appointment of any person to, or his removal from, office by the city manager or any of his subordinates, or in any manner take part in the appointment or removal of officers and employees in that portion of the service of said city for whose administration the city manager is responsible. Except for the through the city manager, and neither the city council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any subordinate of the city manager either publicly or privately. Any member of the city council who violates, or participates in the violation of, any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or both, and upon final conviction thereof his office in the city council shall thereby be vacated and he shall never again be eligible for any office or position, elective or otherwise, in the service of the city.
The Proposed Charter addresses Interference by City Council, but conveniently removes all penalties:
3.3 (d) Interference by City Council Prohibited – Except as provided in Section 2-7 and by this charter, neither the city council nor any of its committees or members shall direct or request the appointment of any person to, or their removal from, office by the city manager or any of their subordinates, or in any manner take part in the appointment or removal of officers and employees in that portion of the service of said city for whose administration the city manager is responsible. Except as otherwise provided by this charter, the city council and its members shall not give orders to any subordinate of the city manager either publicly or privately and shall direct all requests for service through the city manager. Nothing in this section shall prevent city council or its members from discussing matters generally with city staff, presuming the city manager is kept informed.
Without severe penalties against improper Council interference, it is likely that councillors would routinely blow past guardrails that protect against political meddling within City departments. I am of the belief that we should have better mechanisms for inquiry into policies and actions taken within City departments, but removal of these necessary guardrails is definitely not the remedy. - Robert Winters
Meet the New Year, Same as the Old Year - January 6, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting
There is a theme that has run through recent years in Cambridge City government, namely the belief that public input is a problem and that legislation and even proposed changes to the City Charter should reflect this point of view. Any disagreement is dismissed as NIMBYism. Public involvement in matters such as development proposals or roadway reconfigurations is inherently contrary to what the elite in City government see as the public good. We saw this in the various iterations of the Affordable Housing Overlay where not only is public feedback unwelcome, but even the Planning Board’s role has been reduced to that of spectators. It’s also baked into the latest “multi-family zoning” proposals where concerns about radical changes to existing neighborhoods have been either dismissed or at best marginally tolerated. I found it quite telling that in the current discussion about changes to the City Charter, all votes to consider ideas such as “resident assemblies” or “citizen initiative petitions” or “group petitions” were voted down either unanimously or nearly unanimously. The prevailing point of view seems to be that, once elected, our city councillors become all-knowing and all-seeing arbiters of the public good. Democracy is for suckers.
This is, of course, hogwash. For what it’s worth, I think there is great merit in having some form of “resident assemblies” or “ward committees” – even though I think that what was proposed by the Charter Review Committee was not only terrible but disempowering. Anyway, that’s a discussion for another day. I will also note that some councillors are still considering proposing a change in the Charter to extend their terms from two years to four years (staggered terms) - even though they haven’t given even a moment of thought to what this means in terms of our PR elections or the need for a recall provision. Less accountability has some support because apparently having to seek reelection every two years (like every member of the United States House of Representatives and every member of the Massachusetts House and Senate) is just so inconvenient.
Here are a few things that stand out on this week’s agenda:
Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $29,388,181.96 from Free Cash to the Mitigation Revenue Stabilization Fund. During FY24, the City received mitigation revenues from various developers as a result of commitments related to zoning ordinance amendments and special permit conditions. By law, all mitigation revenues must be deposited into the General Fund and can only be appropriated after the Free Cash Certification is complete.
pulled by Siddiqui re: Free Cash balance and source of mitigation revenues; comments by Yi-An Huang, Taha Jennings; Siddiqui wants names of developers; Nolan comments; Order Adopted 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $2,500,000, from Free Cash, to the Finance Department Other Ordinary Maintenance account ($1,500,000), and to the Finance Department Extraordinary Expenditures account ($1,000,000), to support the continued operation and needed capital and equipment improvements to Neville Center, a 5-star skilled nursing facility with 112 beds, which is part of Neville Communities Inc.
pulled by Siddiqui w/questions about meetings related to this; Yi-An Huang notes difficulties in funding health care institutions, some history leading up to this point, changing loan terms w/Rockland Trust; Claire Spinner (Finance) additional comments and explanation; Andy Fuqua (Neville Board) on reducing monthly debt service and preservation of physical building; Siddiqui inquires about role of State Legislature delegation; Fuqua notes recent Act adjusting Medicaid reimbursements; Nolan notes concerns about use of public funds to pay down loan to a private bank, wants to know terms of original loan; Spinner notes that original term was 10 years at a high interest rate, term extended, now to be extended to a 30-year term, current debt service is ~$120,000/month to be reduced to ~$75,000/month; Charter Right - Nolan [Azeem asks if City Manager’s Agenda items are subject to Charter Right (of course they are, as are any New Business items)]
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments and reappointments of members to the Citizens’ Committee on Civic Unity.
Appointments Approved 9-0
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-65, regarding the creation of a jobs training trust through Home Rule Petition. [text of report]
pulled by Toner noting reasons he will be voting No; Sobrinho-Wheeler takes opposite view, naively noting that the Trust need not be funded and that this exists in Somerville and in Boston; Zusy supports intention of this but says cart is before the horse and that existing programs have not been evaluated and that additional funds and increased (already high) Linkage Fee may not be needed, petition is premature; Nolan supports motion w/explanation re: Nexus Study, agrees that existing programs should also be evaluated; JSW offers to have an additional committee meeting on this topic; Toner notes that such a meeting already pending; Home Rule Petition Adopted 7-2 (Toner, Zusy - No)
Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Planning Board Report regarding citywide Multifamily Housing Zoning Petitions.
pulled by Toner re: insinuations that councillors have not paid attention to Planning Board, explains proposed revisions in line with Planning Board suggestions, notes impasse re: development review and relation to AHO; Toner notes that he would prefer to focus first on Squares and Corridors (still undefined) but that other councillors disagree; Azeem notes feedback from both sides of the advocates, prefers version prior to proposed amendments, suggests plenty of time and process to go [not really]; McGovern claims that he and other councillors are listening, disputes suggestion that Council is “eliminating zoning” [which is, of course, an intentional misreading of what people are actually saying]; Nolan notes that exclusive single-family zoning is proposed to be eliminated, wants Planning Board feedback on “4+2” vs. “3+3+3” options, previous Planning Board meetings were specifically about original proposal; Jeff Roberts notes that there is no precedent for back-and-forth w/Planning Board, but that expiration and re-filing would allow for this [It is worth noting that the Planning Board could voluntarily choose to do this. - RW; Simmons notes that Planning Board generally in favor (but with what?), does not want to slow this process down; Nolan notes that Planning Board is advisory to the City Council and has not opined on these specifics even though they have been requested to do so [seems like the CDD staff is the real roadblock here]; Zusy notes that many feel that this process has been rushed, Planning Board report doesn’t really reflect sentiments of Planning Board members and that they gave no recommendation because of their expressed concerns - some of which have not been addressed, possible escalation of property values that will make housing less affordable, notes thousands of letters expressing concerns, wants additional Planning Board meeting on this topic and CDD response to questions raised by councillors; Simmons objects to suggestion that process has been rushed [and not acknowledging that the scale of this proposal is unprecedented]; Jeff Roberts says CDD staff and Law Dept. have been working on this and plan to have responses for Jan 16 Ordinance Committee meeting; Zusy notes some developers are already amassing properties for redevelopment, not much time for evaluation of proposal; Siddiqui notes that Planning Board is only advisory and that City Council’s word is only thing that really matters noting past actions ignoring Planning Board’s advice; Referred to Petition 8-1 (Zusy - No)
Order #1. That the City Manager is hereby requested to work with the relevant City departments to report back on additional multi-family zoning considerations, along with the other amendments put forward by the City Council on Dec 23, 2024. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler to add Siddiqui as co-sponsor (Approved 9-0); Nolan asks clarification of “below current threshold of the inclusionary zoning ordinance”; Toner disagrees with the “average maximum unit size of 2,000 square feet per lot area” requirement; Zusy concurs on this; JSW notes desire to prevent a large single-family (“McMansion”) from being built under proposal; Zusy would prefer language to allow density increase only if increased housing units on the lot; JSW notes that proposal consistent with current zoning language; McGovern dismissively notes that “all we’re doing is asking a question”; Azeem concurs with JSW, says California concept (conditional upzoning based on adding units) noted by Zusy not consistent with existing enabling legislation (Chapters 40A or 40B); Simmons asks if Zusy has a specific proposal); Zusy notes that Azeem answered her question; Order Adopted as Amended 7-2 (Toner, Zusy - No)
Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on two Multifamily Zoning Petitions on Nov 19, 2024. This public hearing was recessed and reconvened on Dec 4, 2024. It was again recessed. It reconvened and adjourned on Dec 19, 2024. [Nov 19, 2024 report] [Dec 4, 2024 report] [Dec 19, 2024 report] [communications]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
These reports actually represent three separate meetings, though they are being lumped together because the first two meetings are technically recessed rather than adjourned. This is an unnecessary confusion.
162 Communications - overwhelming with the message “Stop the Rush – Petition amendments do not address the issues voiced by the community”.
Unfinished Business #1. An Ordinance 2023 #8B has been received from City Clerk, relative to Amend Chapter 14.04 – Fair Housing. [Passed to 2nd Reading Oct 2, 2023; Amended Nov 6, 2023; to remain on Unfinished Business pending legislative approval of Special Act needed prior to ordination] (ORD23-8B)
Siddiqui notes that legislative approval has been obtained, nod to Rep. Marjorie Decker shepherding it through process; Ordained 9-0
According to State Representative Marjorie Decker (who I wish was my representative), legislative approval has now been completed and signed by the Governor, so this matter is now ready for ordination.
Unfinished Business #2. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to proposed amendments to the Cycling Safety Ordinance to extend the deadline associated with the completion of those sections of the ordinance that are required to be completed by May 1, 2026. [Passed to a 2nd Reading Dec 16, 2024; Eligible to be Ordained on or after Jan 6, 2025] (ORD24#8)
McGovern comments, Toner amendment to seek status of Grand Junction Multi-Use Path Adopted 9-0; Nolan says the current timelines are aggressive and that she looks forward to completion of currently planned lanes and additional expansion of the network; Ordained as Amended 9-0
This item is apparently also ready for ordination - though it could really use one important change.
Resolution #8. Condolence Resolution for Dr. Robert S. Peterkin. Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toner
Committee Report #2. The Finance Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Dec 11, 2024 for an update and discussion on Public Investment Planning. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
I suppose money used to grow on trees in Cambridge. Now we have fewer trees and more fiscal constraints. - RW
Special Committee on Charter Review Meeting – Monday, December 9, 1:00pm-3:00pm [Agenda]
December 5th, 2024
To Mayor Simmons and Members of the Cambridge City Council:
As Co-Chairs of the Special Committee on Charter Review, we have scheduled a meeting on December 9th, 2024, from 1 to 3pm for the full Council to discuss the status of Charter Review process and develop a timeline and plan for advancing recommendations to put forward on the November 4th, 2025 ballot.
In advance, we ask that you review the discussions and materials from the June 5th and June 25th, 2024 Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee meetings. Both meetings began with public comment and were followed by discussions on the Charter Review Committee recommendations, challenges of some of the recommendations, and strategies for moving the process forward.
- June 5th Government Operations meeting (VIDEO)
- June 5th Meeting Agenda and Documents
- June 25th Government Operations Committee Meeting (VIDEO)
- June 25th Meeting Agenda and Documents
At this time, the only decision that has been made is that a two-thirds majority of the Council will be required to advance any recommendations to the Attorney General and/or Legislature, and residents on a future ballot.
Our goal for the December 9th meeting is to review each of the recommendations from the Charter Review Committee. We will schedule a follow-up meeting in January 2025 for items that require more discussion, as well as any additional recommendations from the City Council.
Sincerely,
| Paul Toner Co-Chair, Special Committee on Charter Review |
Sumbul Siddiqui Co-Chair, Special Committee on Charter Review |
The Committee met for 2¼ hours and recessed until a to-be-scheduled next meeting in January. All votes taken were recommendations to the full City Council, held for further discussion, or referrals to the Government Operations Committee for possible future action independent of the Charter revision process.
A. City Manager or Strong Mayor form of Government
Vote was 7-2 to in favor of retaining city manager form. (Siddiqui and Sobrinho-Wheeler preferred strong mayor form.)
B. Maintain an at-large city council elected by proportional representation.
Vote was 8-0-1 to retain PR (Simmons Absent).
C. Maintain an at-large city council of 9 members.
Vote was 7-1-1 in favor. (Nolan expressed preference for a mixed system with some district councillors and some at-large. Simmons was Absent.)
D. Enfranchise non-citizens in municipal elections.
Vote was 8-0-1 to refer to Gov’t Ops. Committee for possible future separate Home Rule Petition (Simmons Absent). There were actually two parts to this: (1) allowing non-citizens to vote, and (2) allowing non-citizens to be candidates in municipal elections. Only Councillor Zusy expressed the view that voting rights are intertwined with citizenship.
E. Enfranchise 16- and 17-year-olds in municipal elections.
Vote was 8-0-1 to refer to Gov’t Ops. Committee for possible future separate Home Rule Petition (Simmons Absent).
F. Move municipal elections to even years.
Vote was 8-0-1 to refer to Gov’t Ops. Committee for possible future separate Home Rule Petition (Simmons Absent).
G. Create more flexibility and modernize election voting and tabulation methods in charter language.
Vote was 8-0-1 in favor with directive that Law Department draft appropriate language (Simmons Absent).
H. Participation in and Accessibility of Government for all Residents by creating Resident Assemblies.
Vote was 1-7-1 with only Sobrinho-Wheeler in favor (Simmons Absent).
I. Public tracking mechanisms of council policy orders.
Vote was 1-8 with general view expressed that this is already done and if any further direction is necessary it would be better in incorporate it into the City Council Rules rather than in the City Charter. Only Sobrinho-Wheeler was in favor.
J. Effectiveness of Government through Measurable Goalsetting.
Vote was 0-9 with general view expressed that this is already done and if any further direction is necessary it would be better in incorporate it into the City Council Rules rather than in the City Charter.
K. Maintain 2-year terms for city councillors.
This was held for further discussion at a later meeting. Some councillors expressed view that extending terms might be viewed as self-serving (obviously).
Note: None of the councillors seemed to understand that staggered 4-year terms (5 and 4) would fundamentally change the nature of our PR elections with a much larger election quota and diminution of minority representation. They also failed to understand the need for a recall provision with longer terms - something that is not compatible with our PR elections.]
L. Responsiveness and Accountability through delineating budget process and priority setting.
Vote was 0-9 with general view that this is already done and if any further clarity is needed it would be better in incorporate it into the City Council Rules rather than in the City Charter.
M. Give the City Council the power to add or increase line items in the budget.
This was held for further discussion at a later meeting.
N. Enshrine resident initiative provision.
Vote was 0-9.
O. Enshrine group petition provision.
Vote was 0-9.
P. Campaign finance study committee.
Vote to refer to Gov’t Ops. Committee was 2-7.
| City Council subcommittees for 2024-2025 [revised Sept 30, 2024 due to death of Councillor Joan Pickett] |
|
| Committee | Members |
| Ordinance | McGovern (Co-Chair), Toner (Co-Chair),
Azeem, Nolan, Pickett, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson, Simmons (committee of the whole - mayor ex-officio) |
| Finance | Nolan (Co-Chair), Toner (Co-Chair), Azeem, McGovern, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Zusy, Wilson, Simmons (committee of the whole - mayor ex-officio) |
| Government Operations, Rules, and Claims | Toner (Chair), Azeem, McGovern, Zusy, Sobrinho-Wheeler |
| Housing | Azeem (Chair), Siddiqui (Chair), McGovern, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson |
| Economic Development and University Relations | Toner (Chair), Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, McGovern, Wilson |
| Human Services & Veterans | McGovern (Chair), Wilson (Chair), Sobrinho-Wheeler, Siddiqui, Nolan |
| Health & Environment | Nolan (Chair), Azeem, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson |
| Neighborhood and Long Term Planning, Public Facilities, Art, and Celebrations |
Zusy (Co-Chair), Sobrinho-Wheeler (Co-Chair), Azeem, Nolan, Siddiqui |
| Transportation & Public Utilities | Zusy (Chair), Azeem, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Toner, Wilson |
| Civic Unity | Simmons (Co-Chair), Zusy (Co-Chair), McGovern, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson |
| Public Safety | Toner (Chair), Wilson (Chair), McGovern, Zusy, Siddiqui |
| Family Policy Council | Siddiqui (Co-Chair), Wilson (Co-Chair) |
| Special Committee on Rules | Toner (Chair) |
Rules? We don’t have to follow no stinkin’ rules!
Updated Nov 2, 2024 - In the 2022-23 City Council Rules, there are two items that have been often ignored in recent City Council terms:
Rule 28. Every committee of the City Council to which any subject may be referred shall report on the subject within a reasonable time from the time of referral. Any committee report that has not been signed by the Chair of the committee within seven days after submission of the committee report by the City Clerk will be placed on the City Council agenda unsigned…
Rule 29. Minutes shall be kept of all committee proceedings. All minutes, reports, and papers shall be submitted to the City Council by the City Clerk or their designee. Recommendations of each committee shall be made to the City Council for consideration and adoption.
As if communication through the Tunnel of Zoom wasn’t bad enough, some committee Chairs apparently have not seen fit to keep either their colleagues or the public informed unless they were present at the meeting or chose to view a recording of the meeting. There are reasons why minutes of a meeting are taken. Not everyone wants to suffer through a recording of a long and possibly boring meeting, and a voluminous transcript is not a substitute for good (succinct) minutes.
Here is the current record of deliquency [Chair]: (updated Dec 16, 2024)
Ordinance Committee (7 missing reports) Finance Committee (0 missing reports) Gov’t Operations, Rules & Claims (1 missing report) Health & Environment Committee (2 missing reports) Neighborhood & Long-Term Planning, etc. (1 missing report) Public Safety (0 missing reports) |
Econ. Development & University Relations (4 missing reports) Human Services & Veterans (1 missing report) Housing Committee (0 missing reports) Transportation & Public Utilities (0 missing reports) Civic Unity (0 missing reports) Most Delinquent: Number of Missing Reports: |
City Council subcommittees for 2022-2023
| Committee | Members |
| Ordinance | McGovern (Co-Chair), Zondervan (Co-Chair), Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, Nolan, Siddiqui, Simmons, Toner (committee of the whole - mayor ex-officio, quorum 5) |
| Finance | Carlone (Co-Chair), Nolan (Co-Chair), Azeem, Mallon, McGovern, Siddiqui, Simmons, Toner, Zondervan (committee of the whole - mayor ex-officio, quorum 5) |
| Government Operations, Rules, and Claims | Mallon (Chair), Carlone, Nolan, Simmons, Toner (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Housing | Simmons (Chair), Azeem, Carlone, Mallon, McGovern (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Economic Development and University Relations | Toner (Chair), Azeem, Mallon, Nolan, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Human Services & Veterans | McGovern (Chair), Azeem, Mallon, Toner, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Health & Environment | Nolan (Chair), Azeem, Carlone, McGovern, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Art, and Celebrations | Carlone (Chair), Mallon, McGovern, Nolan, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Transportation & Public Utilities | Azeem (Chair), McGovern, Nolan, Toner, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Civic Unity | Simmons (Chair), Carlone, Mallon, Toner, Zondervan (5 members, quorum 3) |
| Public Safety | Zondervan (Chair), Azeem, McGovern, Nolan, Toner (5 members, quorum 3) |
The Mayor shall serve as ex-officio member of all committees of the City Council.
FYI - Current Rules and Goals: Cambridge City Council & Cambridge School CommitteeCity Council Rules 2020-2021 (as amended Oct 26, 2020) City Council Rules 2018-2019 (provisionally adopted for 2020-2021 term on Jan 6, 2020) City Council Rules 2016-2017 (adopted Feb 29, 2016) City Council Rules 2014-2015 (adopted January 7, 2014, amended Feb 10, 2014 to reflect current Council committees) City Council Goals - FY2012-2013 (adopted Dec 13, 2011) City Council Committees (for the current term) Rules of the School Committee 2020-2021 - Adopted January 6, 2020 (document says 2019-2020) Rules of the School Committee 2018-2019 - Adopted January 1, 2018 School Committee Rules (adopted January 7, 2008) School Committee Goals (adopted October 7, 2008) |
Research Assistants? I don’t think so...
May 2, 2006 – The Cambridge City Council voted 8-1 on May 1 in favor of giving themselves personal “research assistants.” Only Councillor Craig Kelley had the fortitude to raise any questions about the proposal. So it appears the proposal will sail through the Budget Hearings with barely a raised eyebrow. While I have raised the issue of the genesis of this proposal, the question of its merits and its implementation have not been addressed here. So, here are some observations, questions, and suggestions for our elected officials, City administration, and residents to consider:
1. There was a time when our elected officials enlisted citizens to assist them in research matters relating to public policy. Cambridge is perhaps the best city in the United States in which to find experts in almost any matter that the City Council (or School Committee) may need to better understand. There is a wealth of evidence over the last 65 years showing how citizens have worked with elected officials in the development of public policy. If the City Council feels burdened by the research needs of its committees, there is an enormous pool of talent available at no cost. Currently, the City Council makes very little use of this very available resource.
2. There was a time when councillors collaborated much more than they currently do in committee work and in the development of policies. A well-functioning City Council committee should delegate responsibilities so that each member masters certain facets of the tasks at hand and shares this knowledge with the rest of the committee. In effect, councillors serve as staff to each other. I would argue that it is better that elected officials educate themselves.
3. Are these jobs going to be publicly posted with a job description? Who will be doing the actual hiring? If Councillor Smith wants to hire Mr. Jones as personal staff, will the mayor have veto power over the hire? Does the Personnel Department have a role to play here or are these to be political hires? None of these details have been discussed publicly and they are important.
4. If these “research assistants” are to be hired, there should be policies and safeguards to ensure that they are not working on behalf of any councillor’s political campaign. Otherwise, this proposal will have the effect of using taxpayer dollars to support the political campaigns of incumbent councillors. In fact, maybe it’s time to consider a similar disqualification for staff in the Mayor’s Office. A founding principle of Plan E government is the elimination of political patronage in favor of responsible, professional government. Some of us still believe in this ideal. At the very least, strong guidelines should be established for what is and is not permissible.
5. The existence of this proposal within the budget of the Mayor’s Office is very strange indeed since it involves personnel for councillors, not the mayor. Should we not infer from this that the consensus of the councillors is that the City Council staff is not up to the task? If the job of councillor has changed so much, should there not be some discussion of revamping the Office of the City Council to better match the needs of the councillors? Why are these tasks being outsourced?
6. Some councillors have recently stated that the filing of City Council orders requesting information through the City Manager is not enough and that councillors would be better served by having their own staff to get this information. This strikes me as contrary to the intent of the Plan E Charter which dictates that all matters involving City personnel be directed through the Manager. One can easily imagine a scenario where each councillor has his or her personal staff contact City department heads for information rather than filing an Order as a body to get a common response. If the consensus is that the City Manager is being obstructive or extraordinarily slow in responding, shouldn’t the City Council take more forceful action in holding the Manager accountable?
7. If the term “research assistant” is meant to be factual, then perhaps these RAs should be topic-specific so that we can have people who have some background or aptitude for the tasks at hand. If, for example, research in energy-related matters is what is needed, then someone with that knowledge would be ideal. Is any such protocol being discussed to ensure that the councillors and the taxpayers will get the best quality research for their tax dollars? I would hope that matters like scheduling and event planning will be handled by the City Council Office rather than by “research assistants.”
8. Several councillors have complained that e-mail has had a dramatic effect on the responsibilities of a city councillor due to the time consumption associated with responding to these messages. I don’t doubt this. However, there are efficiencies that can make such tasks much easier. For example, if each councillor receives 100 e-mail messages on a particular topic, then rather than making 100 shallow replies, I would advise responding to ALL of the issues of substance raised by residents in a single, comprehensive message sent (using blind-carbon-copy) to all of the people who sent messages. Those of us in academics have been doing this for years. It’s much more effective to craft comprehensive messages sent to the whole class rather than many nearly identical messages sent to individual students. There are MANY ways to be more effective in e-mail communication. Then again, if individual responses are seen as more valuable in securing potential votes in the next election, that’s a choice each councillor must make on his or her own - independent of taxpayer-supported staff.
In summary, I am not questioning whether or not some changes in staffing are warranted. I am, however, asking that any such changes be done in the best interest of taxpayers and that City funds are never used to either directly or indirectly support the reelection efforts of elected officials. - RW, May 3, 2006
Punching Out Your Cake and Having it Too – a chronology of the proposal for personal Council staff
(posted April 28, 2006)
Jan 1998 - The vote for who was to be mayor went on for several weeks as Ken Reeves held out until there were 4 other votes for Katherine Triantafillou, an outcome sincerely supported by at most two councillors (Reeves and Triantafillou). The would-be mayor rounded up her supporters for the coronation. A congratulatory cake was ordered. As the vote occurred and there were momentarily 5 votes on the table for Triantafillou (Born, Davis, Duehay, Reeves, Triantafillou), Councillors Galluccio and Russell changed their votes to Duehay. Councillors Born, Davis, and Duehay then changed their votes to Duehay and Mayor Duehay was elected. Councillor Galluccio was then elected vice-mayor. Meanwhile, in the room next to the Council chamber, Alice Wolf aide and Triantafillou supporter Marjorie Decker exploded in anger and punched out the cake, police were called, and a grudge began that remains to this day.
Feb 1998 - Mayor Duehay made good on the deal by hiring Galluccio campaign worker Terry Smith to work in the Mayor’s Office “to assist the mayor and vice mayor”. This marked the first time (to my knowledge) that any councillor other than the mayor received personal staff (except for a brief experiment with interns some years earlier). Resentment grew among other councillors about the special treatment one councillor received in exchange for delivering the mayor’s job.
1999 - Frank Duehay and Sheila Russell announced they would not seek reelection. Jim Braude, David Maher, and Marjorie Decker were subsequently elected to the City Council as incumbent Katherine Triantafillou was defeated, principally as a result of Marjorie Decker winning her seat.
2000 - After 1½ months without electing a mayor, Anthony Galluccio was able to secure 6 votes to become mayor (Braude, Davis, Galluccio, Maher, Sullivan, Toomey). David Maher was elected vice-mayor. Terry Smith became chief of staff of the Mayor’s Office. David Maher did not request any personal staff. Kathy Born suggested during the Budget hearings that the idea of personal staff for councillors be referred to the Government Operations Committee. Ken Reeves said at this time, “I don’t believe the vice-mayor needs the extra staffing and not us.” Note that this was a reference to the previous administration (Duehay-Galluccio).
Around this time, the Government Operations Committee met to discuss the proposal for personal staff. The estimates given for City Council staff were: (1) $390,250 for a low-level, bare bones proposal; (2) $157,450 for 8 part-time staff with no benefits; (3) $72,300 for one legislative research assistant. Deputy City Manager Rich Rossi said personal staff was tried briefly about 10 years earlier with interns. Michael Sullivan voiced concern about keeping in touch personally with his constituents and wondered how he would find enough things for this person to do. Most of the councillors spoke in support of giving themselves personal staff. Kathy Born said that if she found her job to be too much, she could hire her own staff person, only she would have to pay for it out of after-tax money, unlike an employee of a business. She suggested higher Council pay with the option of paying for a staff person out of this additional pay. The option would remain for a councillor to act as a “full-time councillor” without staff. Jim Braude said that a councillor could lend his or her campaign the money for the staff person.
One week later, the City Manager proposed a 23% pay raise for city councillors and a change in the ordinance to allow for automatic increases so that they would never again have to vote to raise their own pay. The pay raise was approved and the question of personal staff disappeared for the rest of the Council term.
2001 - Kathy Born and Jim Braude chose not to seek reelection. Brian Murphy and Denise Simmons were elected to the City Council.
2002 - Michael Sullivan was elected mayor on Inauguration Day. Henrietta Davis was elected vice-mayor. Unlike the previous term, Henrietta Davis did request and receive personal staff as vice-mayor when Garrett Simonsen, Davis’ election campaign manager, was hired to the Mayor’s Office staff as her assistant. Indications are that he served more than just the vice-mayor.
2004 - Michael Sullivan was again elected mayor, only this time Marjorie Decker was elected vice-mayor. Garrett Simonsen became chief of staff of the Mayor’s Office. Sullivan hired Kristin Franks (who had been Decker’s campaign manager) as “assistant to the mayor and vice-mayor” but the indications were that she was working almost exclusively for Decker. By summer, Franks was gone and Nicole Bukowski, another Decker campaign worker, was hired as exclusive staff to Decker. For the remainder of the Council term, Bukowski waited hand and foot on Decker - and resentment among other councillors grew for the remainder of the Council term.
Late 2005 - Craig Kelley was elected to the City Council and incumbent David Maher was defeated. Speculation immediately began about who would be the next mayor. Some councillors reported that a plan was being discussed to give certain councillors personal staff as part of the vote-trading for electing the mayor.
Early 2006 - Ken Reeves was elected mayor and Tim Toomey vice-mayor. In a surprising turn of events, Bukowski continued to serve out of the Mayor’s Office as personal staff to Councillor Decker - clearly a part of the deal to make Reeves mayor. Rumors circulated that there was a plan to assign some councillors additional committee chairs as justification for getting personal staff. When the committee chairs were announced, Councillor Decker (who, along with Councillor Galluccio, has maintained the worst record of committee attendance during her time on the Council) was surprisingly given four committees to chair. In contrast, Henrietta Davis (who has always been at or near the top in committee attendance) was given only one. This was seen by some as a way to justify Decker keeping her personal aide in exchange for her vote for mayor.
April 2006 - Ken Reeves submitted a budget for the Mayor’s Office that is 54.3% higher than the previous year. The cause for the increase is a proposal for personal staff for all the remaining councillors at a recurring annual cost of about a quarter-million dollars. There was no public indication of any kind that such an extravagant plan was in the works. An order is on the May 1 City Council agenda (after the budget was already submitted on April 24 including the increase) formally calling for the major staff increase. The order is co-sponsored by Reeves, Toomey, Decker, Galluccio, Sullivan, and Davis. It is expected that, like every person hired to date as staff for the vice-mayor (and most of those on the mayor’s staff), all of the new “research assistants” will be affiliated with the election campaigns of the officials they will serve. Curiously, these patronage hires will be occurring at a time when there are fewer major issues before the Council and when an unprecedented number of councillors are either serving in other elected positions or seeking election to other positions now or in the near future. - RW, April 28, 2006
Ref: April 27, 2006 Cambridge Chronicle story on the Council staff proposal
April 27, 2006 Cambridge Chronicle story on the submitted FY07 Budget
|
Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky, One Ring to rule them all, |
The nine Nazgûl arose as Sauron’s most powerful servants in the Second Age of Middle-earth. It is said that three of the Nine were originally “Great Lords” of Númenor. They were all powerful mortal Men to whom Sauron each gave nine Rings of Power. These proved to be their undoing: “Those who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old. They obtained glory and great wealth, yet it turned to their undoing. They had, as it seemed, unending life, yet life became unendurable to them. They could walk, if they would, unseen by all eyes in this world beneath the sun, and they could see things in worlds invisible to mortal men; but too often they beheld only the phantoms and delusions of Sauron. And one by one, sooner or later, according to their native strength and to the good or evil of their wills in the beginning, they fell under the thralldom of the ring that they bore and of the domination of the One which was Sauron’s. And they became forever invisible save to him that wore the Ruling Ring, and they entered into the realm of shadows. The Nazgûl were they, the Ringwraiths, the Enemy’s most terrible servants; darkness went with them, and they cried with the voices of death” (The Silmarillion: “Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age”, 289). |
The corrupting effect of the rings caused their bodily forms to fade over time until they had become wraiths entirely. Given visible form only through their attire, their original form was completely invisible to mortal eyes. The red reflection in their eyes could be plainly distinguished even in daylight, and in a rage they appeared in a hellish fire. They had many weapons, which included long swords of steel and flame, daggers with magical venomous properties and black maces of great strength. |
|