2. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-97, regarding a report on creating a publicly accessible, list of violence prevention programs that exist in the City and to place this list on the City's website. (CM22#21)
pulled by Mallon; Order Adopted 9-0

To: City Manager, Louis A. DePasquale
From: Police Commissioner, Christine Elow, and Assistant City Manager, Ellen Semonoff
Date: February 15, 2022
Ref.: Awaiting Report No. 21-97 of 12/13/21
Re: Report on creating a publicly accessible, comprehensive list of violence prevention programs that exist in the city and to place this list on the City’s website.

The purpose of this response is to address Awaiting Report No. 21-97 from 12/13/21, whereby it was requested to provide a publicly accessible, comprehensive list of violence prevention programs that exist in the city and to place this list on the City’s website.

Prior to this report request, information pertaining to the programs and initiatives that directly and indirectly support violence prevention were available on different City department websites, including sections of the Department of Human Services Programs (DHSP) site and the Community Resources page of the Cambridge Police Department (CPD). These sites, as examples, showcase detailed information on the many ways that the City engages youth and young adults by encouraging community involvement, creating pathways to employment, increasing safety and reducing crime.

Following a review of this request, DHSP and CPD worked together to create a unified website that encompasses the many diversion-based programs, problem-oriented strategies, community outreach, youth engagement programs, special events, sports leagues and programs, and employment and volunteer programs available for our youth and young adults. Currently, the webpage focuses on City-led and City funded programs; content will be expanded to include additional community programs.

https://www.cambridgema.gov/Services/violencepreventionprograms is a preliminary site that will develop over time and become a centralized resource to better serve young people in our community as well as their family members and loved ones.

The new website will be publicized by DHSP, CPD and the City, and made readily available to the Cambridge Public School District.

If there are any additional questions, information needed or concerns regarding this matter, please let us know.

Sincerely,
Christine Elow, Police Commissioner
Ellen Semonoff, Assistant City Manager, Human Services

3. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the reappointment of Michael P. Gardner as a member of the Cambridge Retirement Board for a term of three years, effective Mar 1, 2022. (CM22#22)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting notification of the appointment of Michael P. Gardner as a member of the Cambridge Retirement Board for a term of three years, effective Mar 1, 2022.

As a long-time City of Cambridge employee, a retiree, and a member of the Massachusetts Bar, and with 21 years of experience on the Retirement Board, Mr. Gardner is extremely knowledgeable about personnel and retirement-related matters.

I am confident that Mr. Gardner will continue to serve the City, its retirees and their families, and our employees to the best of his ability.

4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Maxwell Solet as a new member of the Board of Trustees of the Cambridge Health Alliance for a term to expire June 30, 2024. (CM22#23)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting notification of the appointment of Maxwell (Mike) Solet as a member of the Cambridge Health Alliance Board of Trustees effective Feb 17, 2022 for a term to expire June 30, 2024.

Maxwell (Mike) Solet, (Cambridge seat)

Mike Solet is a long-time resident of Cambridge who has served on several local boards, including as a board member and vice-president of the Cambridge Historical Society, as a current member of the board of the Brattle Film Foundation, and a previous term on the CHA Board from 2005 to 2016. Mike is an attorney who, until his retirement, was a member of the firm Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. He specialized in tax law issues related to borrowings by State and local governments and charitable organizations, serving as bond counsel to, among others, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the MBTA, and various student loan agencies. Mike chaired the IRS Advisory Committee on Tax-Exempt and Government Entities, authoring several reports related to issuance of tax-exempt debt. Mike most recently provided pro bono counsel through Health Law Advocates, a public interest law firm committed to ensuring universal access to quality health care in Massachusetts. Mike earned an AB from Harvard College and his Juris Doctor from Harvard Law School.

5. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for new appointments and reappointment to Open Data Review Board for a term of two year. (CM22#24)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for appointment to the Open Data Review Board, for a term of two years, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Reappointments

Cathy Chute is Assistant Dean at the Harvard School of Engineering, where she administers master’s programs in data science and computational engineering. Cathy has deep experience with strategic planning for large data programs and with the creation of cross-organizational partnerships. She has served two terms on the Open Data Review Board and has helped foster important connections between Cambridge’s Open Data Program and the local academic community. She is also the Co-Founder of the Women in Data Science Conference-Cambridge and serves as the Development Committee Chair for the Cambridge Public Library Foundation.

Eric Belford, Assistant Director IT Administration, Information Technology Development

Cliff Cook, Planning Information Manager, Community Development Department

Christina Giacobbe, Director of Emergency Communications & 911, Emergency Communications Department

Lee Gianetti, Director of Communications & Community Relations, Public Information Office

New Appointments

Aditya Basheer is Director of Strategic Innovation in the Massachusetts Governor’s Office. He is the lead for the Commonwealth’s forthcoming criminal justice data platform and helped manage vaccination outreach and deployment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Before that, Mr. Basheer spent five years as a Senior Technical Program Manager at Waymo, a Google subsidiary focused on autonomous vehicles. There he helped foster data partnerships between Waymo and government policy leaders. Before joining Waymo, Aditya spent a summer interning at the White House’s National Economic Council, where he used community-level data to pursue solutions related to digital equity and water conservation.

Anna Decker is an Associate Director of Data Science at a biotechnology startup located in Cambridge. She has several years of experience conducting advanced analytics projects, managing protected data, and building tools for data-driven decision-making. Anna has a PhD in biostatistics and a specific interest in using open data to help create positive public health impacts for a diverse array of community stakeholders. Additionally, in her home state of Minnesota she served on her community’s human rights board.

Chris Cullen is an Associate Director in Harvard University’s Office of Financial Strategy and Planning as well as a lecturer of data communication at MIT’s Sloan School of Management. Before his current roles at Harvard and MIT, Chris spent several years as a public school teacher, product manager at an educational technology startup, and management consultant. Chris has several years of experience using data to tell stories, inform the community, and empower stakeholders to make data-driven decisions. He has incorporated Cambridge’s open data into his MIT data communications course.

7. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for reappointment and new appointment to the Water Board. (CM22#26)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for the Water Board for a term of five years, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Reappointment

James Burruss was originally appointed to the Cambridge Water Board on Apr 15, 1996. He has served the citizens of Cambridge for over 25 years as a Water Board member. He has participated in many workshops relating to the treatment plant, which was put into service in 2001, participated in many recommendations relating to the restoration of Fresh Pond Reservation and has strongly supported the protection of the 24 square mile Cambridge watershed.

New Appointment

Benjamas Lendorff is an accounting professional with for-profit and non-profit international experience with interests in water quality, climate change ad environmental issues. She would like to give back to the community and participate in making changes in these areas.

8. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for reappointments to the Fresh Pond Master Plan Advisory Board. (CM22#27)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for Fresh Pond Master Plan Advisory Board for a term of three years, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Sophia Emperador
Sophia is the Public Planting Committee representative member of the Fresh Pond Master Plan Advisory Board. She has expertise in Landscape Architecture and how it relates to minimizing the effects of Climate Change. She is a standing member that has contributed significantly to carrying out the mission of the Fresh Pond Master Plan.

David Lyons
David is the Conservation Commission representative member of the Advisory Board. He is a standing member that has contributed significantly to carrying out the native plant requirements of the Fresh Pond Master Plan.

Ann Roosevelt
Ann is the Cambridge Water Board representative member of the Advisory Board. She was part of the original Fresh Pond Master Plan Committee and has been a member of the Advisory Board since its inception and continues to be an integral part of the Board. She has exceptional knowledge of Fresh Pond Reservation and is the current President of the Cambridge Water Board.

Candace Young
Candace is a neighborhood resident representative member. She continues to be a valued volunteer implementing Reservation ecological restorations and invasives removal and has contributed significantly to carrying out the mission of the Fresh Pond Master Plan.

10. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for new appointments and reappointments to the Mid Cambridge Neighborhood Conservation District Commission. (CM22#29)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for reappointment and new appointments to the Mid Cambridge Neighborhood Conservation District Commission, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Reappointments

Charles Redmon (member, term to expire 7/5/23)
Mr. Redmon is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is a retired architect and former principal at Cambridge Seven Associates. He specialized in community development and urban design issues.

Monika Pauli (member, term to expire 2/17/25)
Ms. Pauli is a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is a practicing architect and partner at Pauli & Uribe Architects. She specializes in historic buildings and adaptive re-use projects.

Tony Hsaio (alternate, term to expire 2/17/25)
Mr. Hsiao is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is a principal architect and design director at Finegold Alexander Architects. He is currently serving as the chair of the Mid Cambridge NCD Commission.

Margaret McMahon (alternate, term to expire 2/17/25)
Ms. McMahon is a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is a retired publishing executive. She is a Mid Cambridge resident has served on the commission as an alternate since 2013.

Lestra Litchfield (alternate, term to expire 2/17/25)
Ms. Litchfield is a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is an art historian who has coordinated exhibits and educational programming for MIT’s Museum and the Center for Educational Computing Initiatives (CECI).

New Appointments

Katinka Hakuta is a grants manager for a foundation in Boston. She has lived in Cambridge for eight years and volunteers for the Cambridge Community Foundation, Cambridge Volunteer Clearinghouse, and the Friends of the Cambridge Public Library. She has a master’s in public health and completed coursework in urban planning at Harvard.

Andrew Ognibene is a real estate attorney in Boston. He has been living in Cambridge since moving from Virginia three years ago. He is currently renting his apartment, making him eligible to fill the tenant position on the Commission.

11. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for new appointments and reappointments to the Avon Hill Neighborhood Conservation District Commission. (CM22#30)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for reappointment and new appointments to the Avon Hill Neighborhood Conservation District Commission, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Reappointments

Theresa Hamacher (alternate, term to expire 2/28/25)
Ms. Hamacher a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is the president of Versanture Consulting and an independent director of mutual funds.

Levin Campbell (member, term to expire 7/5/23)
Mr. Campbell is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is a middle school history teacher and camp leader who grew up in the neighborhood and still resides there.

Heli Meltsner (member, term to expire 2/28/25).
Ms. Meltsner is a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is a required architectural historian and historic preservationist. She has authored several books on the architectural history of Massachusetts.

Mark Golberg (member, term to expire 2/28/25).
Mr. Golberg is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is a healthcare executive and is currently serving as Vice Chair.

Constantin von Wentzel (alternate, term to expire 2/28/25).
Mr. von Wentzel is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is an economist and has a management position at Navigant Consulting. He has extensive knowledge of mechanical systems for buildings.

New Appointments

McKeldon Smith relocated from New York City during the pandemic to be nearer his family. He is the retired president of the New York Genealogical & Biographical Society and has historic preservation experience through a former position at the non-profit Historic Hudson Valley. He lives adjacent to the district, on the opposite side of Upland Road. His appointment would fulfill the requirement that at least two members have experience in historic preservation.

Freweyni Embaye Gebrehiwet immigrated to the U.S. from Ethiopia and has lived in Cambridge for over ten years. She has been a medical assistant and medical receptionist for the Cambridge Health Alliance since 2009. Her children attend Cambridge public schools. She lives adjacent to the district, on the opposite side of Walden Street.

12. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for reappointments to the Half Crown-Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District Commission. (CM22#31)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for reappointment and new appointments to the Half Crown-Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District Commission, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Peter Schur (member, term to expire 2/28/25)
Dr. Schur is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is co-director of the Lupus Center at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and a professor at Harvard Medical School.

Marie-Pierre Dillenseger (member, term to expire 2/28/25)
Ms. Dillenseger is a neighborhood resident and property owner. She is an author and speaker on Chinese Timing and Spatial strategies. She founded her company, Power Spaces, in 1999.

James Van Sickle (member, term to expire 6/22/23)
Mr. Van Sickle is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is an architect and principal of his own firm. He is serving as the chair of the commission.

Joanne Solet, (CHC representative member, term to expire on 6/22/23)
Dr. Solet is an Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and the Cambridge Health Alliance.

Adrian Catalano (member, term to expire 2/28/25)
Mr. Catalano is a non-resident property owner. He is a photographer and real estate developer and has renovated several historic buildings in Cambridge.

Rory O’Connor (alternate, term to expire 2/21/24)
Mr. O’Connor is a neighborhood resident and property owner. He is a retired professor and business owner. He has lived in Cambridge for over 30 years and resided in the Half Crown-Marsh district for about 15 years.

13. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to approval requested for a new appointment and reappointments to the Historical Commission. (CM22#32)
Charter Right - Mallon

I am hereby transmitting the following persons for your approval for reappointment and a new appointment to the Historical Commission, which transmission shall also serve as the required filing with the City Clerk:

Reappointments

Bruce Irving (member, term to expire 9/30/24)
Mr. Irving, a realtor and building renovation consultant, has been Chair of the Historical Commission since 2017.

Chandra Harrington (member, term to expire 6/26/23)
Ms. Harrington is a fourth generation Cambridge resident and retired museum executive. Ms. Harrington also serves as the Commission representative on the Community Preservation Committee and as a member of the Cambridge Black History Trail Committee.

Joanne Solet (member, term to expire 6/22/23)
Dr. Solet serves as the required resident of the Old Cambridge Historic District. She is an Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the Harvard Medical School and the Cambridge Health Alliance.

Susannah Tobin (member, term to expire 6/1/23)
Ms. Tobin is the required lawyer member and is the Commission’s Vice Chair. She is a faculty member at the Harvard Law School.

Joseph Ferrara (member, term to expire 7/7/23)
Mr. Ferrara is the president and CEO of Boston Healthcare, a life-sciences consulting company. He was the nominee of the Cambridge Historical Society. He also brings to the commission experience in architecture, which he practiced from 1985 until 1996.

Paula Paris (alternate, term to expire 10/18/23)
Ms. Paris is a lifelong resident of West Cambridge. She is Deputy Director of the educational non-profit JFY NetWorks, which prepares disadvantaged urban youth for college and the workplace. She is a member of the Cambridge Black History Trail Committee.

Gavin Kleespies (alternate, term to expire 10/18/23).
Mr. Kleespies began his career in local history at the age of 13 as a Harvard Square tour guide. He served as Executive Director of the Cambridge Historical Society and is now the Director of Programs at the Massachusetts Historical Society.

New Appointment

Yuting Zhang (member, term to expire 2/28/25)
Ms. Zhang serves as the required member nominated by the Boston Society of Architects. She is a practicing architect, currently working at Utile, Inc. in Boston and a resident of Kendall Square. Ms. Zhang is a native of Beijing and holds architectural degrees from Tsinghua University and Harvard’s Graduate School of Design. She is currently working on a range of projects, including adaptive reuse of a Masonic temple in Quincy and a renovation and adaptive reuse project at MIT.

14. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining its AAA rating from the nation's three major credit rating agencies.[Moody’s] [S&P] [Fitch] (CM22#33)
pulled by Toner; Placed on File 9-0

I am pleased to inform you, the taxpayers, and all our residents that the City of Cambridge has again received AAA ratings from each of the nation’s three major credit rating agencies. Cambridge is currently one of only 26 cities in the United States with this noteworthy distinction. Each year since 1999, the City has received these ratings from Moody’s Investors Service, S&P Global Ratings, and Fitch Ratings.

This is an especially significant achievement given the unprecedented fiscal challenges and uncertainty that we have faced over the past 2 years, and demonstrates the importance of sustaining financial flexibility, maintaining adequate reserves, and continuing to carefully monitor revenues and expenditures.

Since the emergence of COVID-19 in Cambridge, the City’s priority has been to mitigate the spread of the virus and provide critically needed services, particularly to the most vulnerable members of the community including individuals, families, small businesses, and non-profit organizations. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, we have also taken proactive steps to address fiscal uncertainties and shortfalls in several key revenues that remain below historical levels, including by reducing certain expenditures; carefully reviewing vacancies; and strategically using reserves.

At the same time, the City has maintained a high level of service to the community and continued our increased support for important City priorities and initiatives including affordable housing, school services, library expansion, small business programs, traffic safety, open space, and climate initiatives.

The favorable credit ratings that the City has consistently received play a direct role in maintaining our enviable, and relatively unique, ability to continue to invest in major municipal and infrastructure projects while preserving financial flexibility, and limiting the burden placed on taxpayers in the community, even throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Major projects related to our municipal facilities, streets and sidewalks, schools, and infrastructure, are important investments for the future and also reflect City Council and community priorities.

The rating agencies highlighted the City’s strong financial position; a large, stable, and diverse tax base; ample excess levy capacity under Proposition 2½; budgetary flexibility; and a strong and experienced management team.

These ratings are in conjunction with the City’s sale of $92.3 million in General Obligation bonds. The competitive sale will take place on March 2, 2022.

Capital projects funded in this bond issuance include Fire headquarters construction, fire station repairs; street and sidewalk reconstruction; River Street reconstruction; Tobin Montessori and Vassal Lane Upper School construction; school improvement projects; municipal facilities projects; sewer reconstruction and repairs; and climate change projects.

After 20 years of service with the City as Assistant City Manager for Fiscal Affairs, and as City Manager, this is my last communication to City Council regarding the City’s credit ratings. While the overall message and rating outcome has been consistent over the last 20 years, the City’s extraordinary fiscal performance and stability should not be taken for granted. It is the result of a collaborative effort between the City’s finance team, City departments, and City Council to maintain and follow strong fiscal policies and practices. Even as the City emerges from the most significant impacts of COVID-19 it will remain very important to maintain the fiscal framework that has served us well and allowed us to accomplish so much together.

We should all take a tremendous amount of pride in the legacy that we have created for the city. As reaffirmed from the ratings highlighted below, I believe that the future is bright, and am optimistic that the City will be in a strong position to continue to support major new investments and initiatives, while maintaining fiscal stability and predictability for years to come.

Listed below are highlights from the Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch credit reports. Attached are the individual rating opinions.

Moody’s Investors Services

Summary

Cambridge (Aaa stable) benefits from a large and diverse tax base that continues to experience strong growth. The city's economy is driven by the presence of Harvard University (Aaa stable) and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT, Aaa stable) and the impressive research and development sector. The city's financial position is strong with very healthy reserves and liquidity (see exhibit) that are maintained by formal policies and conservative fiscal management. Both the debt burden and long-term liabilities for pension and OPEB are conservatively managed and are likely to remain manageable.

Credit strengths

• Large tax base anchored by institutional presence and robust commercial sector

• Healthy financial position guided by formal policies and strong fiscal management

• Ample operating flexibility with excess levy capacity under the tax levy limit, Proposition 2 ½

• Aggressive funding schedule for unfunded pension liability

Credit challenges

• High regional cost of living and cost of business

• Taxpayer concentration in research and development

Rating outlook
The stable outlook reflects the city’s strong fiscal management that is committed to maintaining a healthy financial position given conservative multiyear budget forecasting and adherence to formally adopted fiscal policies. The outlook also incorporates the stabilizing presence of Harvard University and MIT as well as the long historical trend of positive valuation growth in the tax base.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade

• Significant growth in the debt burden or unfunded long-term liabilities

• Material decline in the tax base or weakening of the local economy

• Decline in reserves to below comparable levels of the highest rating category

Environmental, Social, Government and Management (ESG) Considerations

Environmental

Environmental risks are not material to the city's credit profile at this time. Moody's ESG Solutions indicates that Middlesex County in which the city resides has high exposure to hurricanes, medium exposure to extreme rainfall, water stress and sea level rise and low exposure to heat stress. The city is committed to addressing environmental risk associated with flooding and heat exposure. In July 2021, the city released the Resilient Cambridge Plan that with benchmarks for 2030 and 2070. The plan details 34 strategies to increase physical and social resilience focusing on closer neighborhoods, better buildings, strong infrastructure and a greener city. The city continues to coordinate efforts regionally with neighboring cities, the state and other environmental associations.

Social

Cambridge leverages its strong credit profile by focusing on significant community initiatives. These initiatives include a robust bike ordinance, participatory budgeting that gives residents a voice in capital and other spending, providing a proportional share of funding toward the MBTA green line extension, and offering a small business personal property tax exemption. Additionally, the city continues to increase its funding toward affordable housing projects. The fiscal 2022 budget included over $32 million from property taxes, department revenue and the Community Preservation Act fund directed to the affordable housing trust. The trust helps to preserve existing affordable housing units throughout the city and help finance construction toward new affordable housing options.

Governance

The city's experienced management team is very strong, as evidenced by the maintenance of very healthy liquidity and reserves as well as adherence to formal fiscal policies, conservative multiyear budgeting and capital planning. The city's longtime city manager is retiring at the end of the current fiscal year in July 2022 and the city is at the beginning stages of hiring for the position.

Financial operations and reserves: healthy financial position is expected to remain due to conservative budgeting and robust revenue growth

Cambridge's financial position will likely remain strong over the near term given ample liquidity, robust revenue growth and operating flexibility under the tax levy limit that are maintained by conservative fiscal management. Similar to fiscal 2020, the fiscal 2021 audited financials reflect the general fund producing $12.2 million of revenue in excess of expenses and a transfer out of the general fund of $56.4 million. Around $52 million of the transfers out went toward capital expenditures. The primary revenue source is property taxes representing 65% of 2021 general fund revenue. The largest expenses are education and public safety representing 34% and 19% of 2021 expenditures, respectively.

S&P Global

Credit Overview

Cambridge is an affluent suburb immediately adjacent to Boston. Home to both Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the city is at the epicenter of biotech, pharmaceutical, and other technology-based sectors, which continue to generate growth in the tax base. While it faces challenges in addressing housing, transportation, and other infrastructure needs, we expect Cambridge to remain a desirable location to live and work with sustained economic growth and a management team working to address these issues. Its credit profile is characterized by significant budgetary flexibility, a history of comprehensive long-term financial planning, and well-embedded financial management policies. We do not expect to revise the rating in the two-year outlook period.

The long-term rating reflects our view of the following factors for the city, including its:

• High wealth and income metrics with a continuously growing tax base in both residential and commercial sectors, along with access to a broad and diverse metropolitan statistical area (MSA);

• Well-embedded financial policies with significant forward-looking planning and a strong institutional framework;

• Stable revenue and expenditure profiles leading to very strong reserve levels and material excess levy capacity, despite planned drawdowns; and

• Stable debt profile but with a large unfunded retirement obligation.

Downside scenario

While unlikely, if reserve drawdowns resulted in a significant decline, or if debt service and retirement costs were to significantly increase, we could lower the rating.

Environmental, social, and governance factors

While not directly on the Atlantic Ocean, we believe Cambridge is vulnerable to environmental risks, including rising water levels from climate change that could directly affect taxable properties. The city has a history of proactively addressing future challenges, and, to this end, management maintains long-term plans to improve environmental resiliency. We analyzed Cambridge's social and governance risks relative to its economy, management, financial measures, and debt and liability profile, and determined that all are in line with our view of the sector standard.

Dynamic knowledge-based economy supporting very strong economic metrics

Directly adjacent to Boston, Cambridge is an integral part of the larger broad and diverse MSA. Two subway lines, multiple highways, and a commuter rail connect it directly to downtown Boston. Harvard University and MIT, its two leading employers and two of the largest taxpayers, anchor the local economy. They serve as knowledge centers and focal points for dozens of start-ups, research centers, and life-science and high-technology companies. Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Kayak, Pfizer, IBM, and Pegasystems all have offices in the city. The tax base is about 60% residential and 38% commercial and industrial. While some knowledge-based companies are decentralizing and putting into question the future state of commercial real estate, we believe that the high concentration of lab-space and life-science investment in Cambridge, and its integration into the surrounding universities, may limit exodus from the city, particularly as demand for commercial lab space remains very high. The vacancy rate for commercial office space is 5.8% and 0.3% for lab space. A two-year moratorium on new lab and office space is being considered for the Alewife area of the city, to allow for the development of planning and zoning ordinances for the area. Developers continue to develop plans for Alewife and lab development is ongoing in other parts of the city. Ultimately, we expect material development in Alewife over the long term and overall expect Cambridge’s tax base to continue to grow, with underlying wealth and income metrics remaining stable.

Very strong financial management environment expected to continue through personnel changes

We understand that the city manager is retiring within the next year. Cambridge has a long-standing history of maintaining continuity of the financial management team and overall financial management environment through developing and promoting from within. While the city is undertaking an extensive external search for a new manager, we expect the financial management environment will remain very stable, given the well-embedded policies and practices and continuity across the team.

The city's annual budget development process supports its overarching goals, which include significant investments in its education system, housing, transportation network, environmental goals, and other quality of life issues, while maintaining financial balance. Active management of discretionary spending and ongoing monitoring of spending ensure adherence to the adopted budget.

The annually updated five-year financial and capital investment plans outline immediate fiscal challenges while determining and prioritizing capital needs. The city invests in the state-run Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust (MMDT) and bank deposits. We understand it is revising its investment policy to meet investment goals related to its socially responsible investment goals, but we do not expect this to add risk to its portfolio

Stable revenue and expenditure profiles but with continued budgeted use of reserves

The city is continuing its multiyear budgeting plan to appropriate and expend reserves for capital items and to lower the property tax rate. Given the strength of the city’s reserve profile, along with its flexibility under the levy limit--it has $197 million in unused levy capacity, about 26% of 2022 budgeted operating expenditures--we believe it has the budgetary flexibility to continue its reserve expenditure plan. We continue to view its performance as adequate, as we believe management is executing a well-formulated budgetary plan, but is ultimately relying on one-time measures to support ongoing needs. We expect it to maintain very strong reserves and cash balances over the foreseeable future.

The city’s revenue and expenditure profile remains predictable, with local property taxes accounting for about 65% of fiscal 2021 operating revenues. Departmental revenue was about 13% and intergovernmental aid was 12%. With some minor variations, these levels are consistent year to year, which we expect to continue. We understand that the city’s hotel and meal excise taxes as well as parking fee revenues continue to rebound from the recession, with management reporting that parking revenues are about at pre-pandemic levels. Noncapital expenditures are largely personnel costs, which are predictable. As the city prepares its fiscal 2023 budget, we expect it will continue to look to expend reserves to maintain the tax rate and address capital needs, but with limited change in budgeted revenues and expenditures. Over the long term, its unfunded retirement liability carrying charges may increase, but we expect it will continue to incorporate these into the annual levy. We do not expect to revise our view of performance, flexibility, or liquidity profiles during the outlook period.

Stable debt profile with manageable costs, likely to remain so

As the city continues investments in schools, fire stations, and other tax-backed projects, we believe it could add debt at a rate faster than outstanding principal is paid. Current debt outstanding fell below our 60% debt-to-revenue threshold, but given future debt issuances, we believe it is likely to grow to more than 60% over the next two years. Ultimately, we do not believe there is likely to be significant movement in the city’s debt profile.

In our opinion, a credit weakness is Cambridge's large pension and other postemployment benefit (OPEB) obligation. Its combined required pension and actual OPEB contributions totaled 7.4% of total governmental fund expenditures in 2021. Of that amount, 4.7% represented required contributions to pension obligations, and 2.7% represented OPEB payments. The city made 101% of its required pension contribution in 2021. The funded ratio of the largest pension plan is 90.6%.

Manageable retirement costs, but a large unfunded liability and expected cost growth

• Cambridge's large pension and OPEB obligation is a credit weakness. While actuarially determined, we believe some of the assumptions used to build the pension required contribution are permissive and could lead to fluctuating costs.

• Additionally, the adopted funding schedule relies on significant cost escalation to meet a rapid amortization goal.

• While the city is contributing $2 million annually above the OPEB pay-as-you-go cost, its plan to address these costs relies on full funding of the pension plan. In the interim, we expect costs will continue to rise.

Fitch Ratings

The City’s ‘AAA’ GO bond rating and Issuer Default Rating (IDR) reflect Fitch’s expectation for Cambridge to maintain a high level of financial flexibility through economic cycles, consistent with a history of strong operating performance and budget controls.  The rating further reflects the City’s wealthy resource base and future potential for continued tax base increases, along with moderate expenditure growth and demonstrated ability to reduce expenditures during economic downturns.  Fitch expects long-term liabilities to remain low based on the city’s capital needs, very rapid pace of principal amortization, continued growth in economic resources and a practice of fully funding actuarially determined pension contributions.

Key rating drivers

Revenue Framework: 'aaa'

Revenues are derived primarily from property taxes and total annual general fund revenue growth over the past 10 fiscal years has exceeded both U.S.GDP and CPI for the same period, reflective of strong growth in Cambridge's economy and tax base. Prospects remain strong for future advancement. The city maintains significant excess levy capacity under the state's Proposition 2 1/2 law, providing for a high legal ability to raise revenues.

Expenditure Framework: 'aa'

The natural pace of spending growth is expected by Fitch to be in line with to below natural revenue growth over time. Carrying costs for debt and retiree benefits claim a moderate proportion of governmental spending. Fitch expects carrying costs to remain moderate even with future debt issuances and annual increases in other-post employment benefit {OPEB) and pension contributions. The city maintains strong legal control over headcount and other key employment terms as provided by state statute.

Long-Term Liability Burden:'aaa'

Cambridge's direct debt, net of water and sewer debt paid from user charges, and Fitch-adjusted net pension liabilities {NPL) are low at approximately 6% of residents' personal income. Fitch anticipates Cambridge's long-term liability burden will remain in line with the 'aaa' assessment based on expected growth in the city's population and personal income, future debt plans, and a rapid pace of principal amortization. OPEB liabilities compared to personal income are high when compared to debt and NPLs, but management is actively managing these costs.

Operating Performance:'aaa'

Careful expenditure management combined with moderate tax levy increases that have aligned with tax base changes and conservative financial forecasting have led to the maintenance of considerable reserves over the past decade. Fitch expects the city will continue to demonstrate a superior level of gap-closing capacity and maintain a high level of fundamental financial flexibility throughout future economic cycles.

Rating Sensitivities

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade:

• A sustained increase in expenses outpacing revenues leading to a decline in unrestricted reserves and reducing overall financial flexibility.

• A significant decline in taxable assessed values leading to substantial diminishment of the city's excess banked levy capacity.

Operating Performance

Fitch expects the city to maintain a high level of financial resilience throughout economic cycles given its historically strong revenue performance, conservative budgeting practices and superior degree of inherent budget flexibility. The steady growth in revenues has supported surplus operations over the past several fiscal years and the city has built up its reserves to high levels, supporting its high level of financial flexibility.

During times of economic weakness, management has controlled spending and staffing levels to offset reductions in revenues and Fitch expects management will continue this practice during future downturns. The city's strong budget monitoring practices and financial planning bolster the city's operating environment.

15. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the Climate Resilience Zoning Task Force Report. (CM22#34)
pulled by Nolan; referred to Health & Environment Committee 9-0 (motion of Nolan)

TO: Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager
FROM: Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development
DATE: February 23, 2022 RE: Climate Resilience Zoning Task Force Report

Please find attached the final report of the Cambridge Climate Resilience Zoning Task Force. The Task Force was formed in 2019 to bring together diverse stakeholders to identify development standards that would increase the capacity of development in Cambridge to withstand and adapt to impacts from climate change. Task Force members included residents from neighborhoods throughout the city, a union/trades representative, representatives from academic institutions, affordable housing builders, small business representatives, property owners, subject matter experts, and City staff.

Over the course of 19 meetings, the Task Force learned about the climate change vulnerabilities identified in the Cambridge Climate Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA), and reviewed recommendations from the Resilient Cambridge Plan and the Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP). The Task Force then identified a set of principles and objectives, which guided the development of their recommendations.

The final recommendations of the Task Force are included in this report and were developed based on a consensus approach. Overall, these recommendations aim to do the following:

• Codify flood risk standards in zoning based on future projections, not past experience.

• Create new zoning standards for heat resilience that have flexibility and choice built in.

• Remove zoning obstacles that would allow property owners to make their property more resilient.

• Promote a holistic approach to reviewing the sustainability and resilience of major new development.

• Ensure that buildings being built today are resilient throughout their lifetime.

City staff have begun working to develop zoning text based on these recommendations. Through this process, staff will have to evaluate how to incorporate those recommendations within the parameters of what can be legally regulated through zoning. In instances where the final zoning standards look different from the initial recommendations, they will still meet the Principles and Objectives identified by the Task Force. Since amending the Zoning Ordinance requires the Planning Board and the City Council’s Ordinance Committee to hold public hearings, there will be many opportunities for continued public comment and involvement. City staff also intends to provide opportunities for the Task Force to provide input when the zoning text is drafted.

16. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a request for approval of the special act that has been enacted by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, entitled “Chapter 19 of the Acts of 2022, An Act Authorizing the City of Cambridge to Use Certain Land for General Municipal Purposes and the Installation of Subsurface Geothermal Wells” at the Father Callanan Playground and Fields in conjunction with the Tobin Montessori and Vassal Lane Upper Schools Project.[Tobin Article 97 Plan] [Tobin Art 97 Special Act Parchment] [Tobin Special Act Order] (CM22#35)
Order Adopted 9-0

I am writing to inform you of the successful submission and approval of the Home Rule Petition that (1) authorizes the City of Cambridge (“City”) to relocate land protected by Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution (“Article 97”) at the Father Callanan Playground and Fields in Cambridge (“Callanan Field”), that are adjacent to the Tobin Montessori and Vassal Lane Upper Schools, and that (2) authorizes the City to construct subsurface geothermal wells under a portion of the Callanan Field. Attached hereto is the special act that has been enacted by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, entitled “Chapter 19 of the Acts of 2022, An Act Authorizing the City of Cambridge to Use Certain Land for General Municipal Purposes and the Installation of Subsurface Geothermal Wells,” together with the plans referenced therein.

Relief was required from the Legislature to complete the Tobin Montessori and Vassal Lane Upper Schools Project (“Project”). The Project will provide a more usable and comfortable school building, advance the City’s sustainability goals through use of various sustainable systems and energy saving features, improve stormwater management, and increase and improve the City’s designated Article 97 protected land.

In order for the Legislation to take effect and for the City to proceed with the Project, the City Council must accept the terms of the special act by a majority vote. I therefore respectfully request that the City Council vote in favor of accepting the special act. Attached hereto is a proposed Order accepting Chapter 19 of the Acts of 2022, An Act Authorizing the City of Cambridge to Use Certain Land for General Municipal Purposes and the Installation of Subsurface Geothermal Wells.

CHARTER RIGHT
1. That Article 10.000 of the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Cambridge be amended to insert a new section 10.600, titled “On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure”. [Charter Right - Zondervan, Feb 7, 2022] (PO22#17)
Placed on File 9-0 (based on negative opinion from Atty. Gen. Maura Healey on comparable proposed ordinance in Brookline)

O-2     Feb 7, 2022
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
WHEREAS: On Dec 13, 2021, the City Council passed a unanimous policy order regarding the incentivization of fossil fuel free construction through the special permit process; and
WHEREAS: The Council requested a report back from City Staff on the draft ordinance language forwarded with the policy order no later than Feb 1, 2022, which date has passed; and
WHEREAS: The climate crisis is a pressing emergency and fossil fuel free buildings are feasible, as evidenced by new construction in Cambridge currently being built without fossil fuel infrastructure other than minimal legally required backup systems; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That Article 10.000 of the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Cambridge be amended to insert a new section 10.600, titled “On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure” to read as follows:

Section 10.60: On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

1. Purpose

This section is adopted by the City of Cambridge, to protect the health and welfare of the inhabitants of the City from air pollution, including greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change and thereby threaten the City and its inhabitants.

2. Definitions

As used in this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

“New Building” is defined as a building not in existence on the date of an application for a special permit that is subject to this section.

“On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure” is defined as fossil fuel piping that is in a building, in connection with a building, or otherwise within the property lines of premises, including piping that extends from a supply source; provided, however, that “On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure” shall not include:

a. Fuel gas piping connecting a supply source to a meter or to the meter itself; or

b. Fossil fuel piping related to backup electrical generators, cooking appliances or portable propane appliances for outdoor cooking and heating.

“Significant Rehabilitation” is defined as an alteration, requiring a building permit, to a building in existence on the date of an application for a special permit that is subject to this section, and that:

a. For existing buildings regulated by the 9th Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code 780 CMR 51.00, the Massachusetts Residential Code, includes the reconfiguration of space or building systems, in which the Work Area is more than 75% of the gross floor area as defined in the Zoning Ordinance prior to the project; or

b. For existing buildings regulated by the 9th Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code 780 CMR 34.00, the Massachusetts State Basic Commercial Code, includes the reconfiguration of space and/or building systems, in which the Work Area is more than 50% of the gross floor area, as defined by the Massachusetts Building Code, prior to the project.

“Work Area” is defined as the aggregate area of those portions of a building affected by alterations for the reconfiguration of space or building systems, including new floor area added as a result of the alteration, as indicated in the drawings associated with a building permit application. Excluded from the calculation of Work Area are those portions of a building where only repairs, refinishing or incidental work occur or where work not initially intended by the applicant is specifically required by an inspector from the Building Department pursuant to the applicable building code.

3. Applicability

The requirements of this section shall apply to all special permit applications for New Buildings or Significant Rehabilitations proposed to be located in whole or in part within the City or for uses to be located within such New Buildings or Significant Rehabilitations, as well as to applications for the continuation of New Buildings, Significant Rehabilitations or uses authorized by a special permit previously issued subject to this section, except as follows:

a. The requirements of this section shall apply only to project proposals that

1. Require a special permit pursuant to section 10.40 for the proposed structure, alteration or use; and

2. Include a New Building or Significant Rehabilitation as defined in this section.

b. The requirements of this section shall not apply to any application for a special permit granted on or before the later of March 1, 2022 or the date of first issuance of Planning Board guidelines pursuant to paragraph 7 of this section.

c. The requirements of this section shall not apply to the piping, in buildings with floor areas less than 10,000 square feet, required to produce potable or domestic hot water from centralized hot water systems if the Engineer of Record certifies that no commercially available electric hot water heater can meet the building’s hot water demand for less than 150% of installation or operational costs, compared to a conventional fossil-fuel hot water system.

d. The requirements of this section shall not apply to the extension or modification of heating systems via HVAC system modification, or modification of radiator, steam, or hot water piping if fossil fuel piping is not installed.

e. The requirements of this section shall not apply to health care uses that require licensure or certification as a healthcare facility by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

f. The requirements of this section shall not apply to repairs or replacement of any existing portions of a fuel piping system deemed unsafe or dangerous by the Plumbing and Gas Fitting Inspector.

g. The requirements of this section shall not apply to any required back-up emergency system.

h. The requirements of this section shall not apply to any application for a special permit, made pursuant to the Design Review requirements of section 5.09, if no other special permit is otherwise required.

i. The requirements of this section shall not apply to any application for a special permit for the renovation, reconstruction, alteration or extension of a nonconforming single or two-family residence, where the only relief needed represents an increase or intensification of a nonconformity lawfully in existence at the time the applicable provision of the Zoning Ordinance became effective.

4. Climate Responsive Conditions for Approval of Special Permits Except as otherwise provided in this section, the Planning Board or Board of Zoning Appeal shall not approve any special permit application made pursuant to section 10.40 unless the Board finds that:

a. The proposal does not involve the installation of any new On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure or the continuation of any On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure installed pursuant to a special permit previously issued subject to this section; or

b. The proposal involves the installation of On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure or the continuation of any On-Site Fossil Fuel Infrastructure installed pursuant to a special permit previously issued subject to this section; provided, however, that either:

1. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph 4, subparagraph b(2) of this section, the special permit shall be conditionally approved for a term not to exceed five years from the date of its first exercise or until January 1, 2030, whichever is later; or

2. Where a special permit has previously been issued subject to paragraph 4, subparagraph b(1) of this section, it may, for good cause, be renewed, one or more times, for a term not to exceed one year; or

5. Waivers

A waiver from the requirements of paragraph 4 of this section may be approved by the Planning Board or Board of Zoning Appeal, in its special permit decision, upon a finding:

a. If supported by a detailed cost comparison provided by the applicant, that strict compliance with the requirements of paragraph 4 would be financially infeasible, including after utilizing available rebates and credits, or otherwise impractical to implement; or

b. That strict compliance with the requirements of paragraph 4 would result in the loss of new affordable housing units eligible for inclusion in the Department of Housing and Community Development Chapter 40B Subsidized Housing Inventory.

No modification of a special permit, the rights under which have previously been exercised, shall grant a waiver from the requirements of this section. In considering any waiver request, the Planning Board or Board of Zoning Appeal shall evaluate whether particular portions of a project are financially infeasible or impractical to implement, or would result in the loss of new affordable housing units, and the Board shall issue waivers narrowly for those portions, where appropriate, rather than for an entire project.

6. Notices

For a special permit granted subject to paragraph 4, subparagraph b of this section, any notice that is required to be recorded pursuant to M.G.L. c.40A, §11, shall include a statement detailing the condition upon which the special permit was granted.

For all properties subject to a special permit conditioned on a time limitation pursuant to paragraph 4, subparagraph b(1) of this section, the City Manager or designee will provide notice to the owner of record of the expiration of said special permit and the requirement of compliance with this section. Such notice will be first provided not less than three (3) years prior to the expiration of such a special permit, and annually thereafter; provided, however, that the failure of the City Manager or designee to issue timely notices pursuant to this paragraph shall not be deemed to prevent the Building Commissioner from seeking to enforce the requirements of this section or otherwise to operate as a defense to any such enforcement action.

7. Rules, Regulations, and Guidelines

No later than 3 months after the adoption of this amendment, the Planning Board or Board of Zoning Appeals shall adopt, and may in its discretion thereafter amend, guidelines for procedures and waivers that will provide for the uniform and equitable application of this section. The Planning Board or Board of Zoning Appeal may consider such guidelines in making special permit decisions subject to this section.

2. That section 6.36 entitled, Schedule of Parking and Loading Requirements, of Article 6.000, entitled “Off Street Parking And Loading Requirements And Nighttime Curfew On Large Commercial Through Trucks”, of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge be amended. [Charter Right - Simmons, Feb 7, 2022] (PO22#19)
Referred to Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0

O-4     Feb 7, 2022  Amended; Charter Right - Simmons
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
WHEREAS: Some residents in Cambridge drive and benefit from off-street parking spaces; not every resident, however, drives a car, and so the City should not require, but still allow, homes to have off-street parking spaces; and
WHEREAS: Parking minimums can force homeowners and residential & commercial developers to accommodate space for more parking than they deem necessary, leading to higher project costs and a decrease in the number of units or amount of open space; and
WHEREAS: The City should review its maximum parking requirement periodically to ensure they meet our transportation and environmental goals; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That section 6.36 entitled, Schedule of Parking and Loading Requirements, of Article 6.000, entitled “Off Street Parking And Loading Requirements And Nighttime Curfew On Large Commercial Through Trucks, of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge”, be amended by substitution with the language attached.

Minimum accessory parking required for all uses shall be 0 parking spaces.

3. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct staff from the Community Development and Law Departments to examine the Zoning Ordinance and provide amendment language for consideration by the City Council to remove all other references to parking minimums, including in Articles 13.000, 14.000, 15.000, 16.000, 17.000, and 20.000. [Charter Right - Simmons, Feb 7, 2022] (PO22#24)
Referred to Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0

O-9     Feb 7, 2022  Amended; Charter Right - Simmons
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
WHEREAS: Some residents in Cambridge drive and benefit from off-street parking spaces. Not every resident, however, drives a car, and so the City should not require, but still allow, homes to have off-street parking spaces; and
WHEREAS: Parking minimums can force homeowners and residential & commercial developers to accommodate space for more parking than they deem necessary, leading to higher project costs and a decrease in the number of units or amount of open space; and
WHEREAS: The City should review its maximum parking requirement periodically to ensure they meet our transportation and environmental goals; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct staff from the Community Development and Law Departments to examine the Zoning Ordinance and provide amendment language for consideration by the City Council to remove all other references to parking minimums, including in Articles 13.000, 14.000, 15.000, 16.000, 17.000, and 20.000; and further be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct staff from the Community Development and Law Departments to examine the Zoning Ordinance and provide amendment language for commercial parking maximums.

ON THE TABLE
4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-93, regarding proposed amendments to the Municipal Code relative to recent charter changes. (Ordinance #2022-2). [Charter Right - Nolan, Jan 31, 2022; Tabled Feb 7, 2022] (CM22#10)  See Mgr #17
Referred to Ordinance Committee 9-0 (motion of Zondervan)

Jan 31, 2022
To the Honorable, the City Council:

In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-93, regarding proposed amendments to the Municipal Code to comply with the recent charter changes, City Solicitor Nancy E. Glowa has provided the attached proposed amendments for your consideration.

Very truly yours,
Louis A. DePasquale
City Manager

---

Be it ordained by the City Council as follows:

That Cambridge Municipal Code Chapter 2.02 entitled “City Council” shall be amended by the addition of the following two sections:

Section 2.02.090 Annual Review of City Manager’s Performance

As provided in G.L. c. 43, § 116(a) the City Council shall prepare and deliver to the City Manager an annual written review of the City Manager’s performance.

Section 2.02.100 Special Committee to Review the City Charter Every Ten Years

As provided in G.L. c. 43, §116(b), no later than July 1 in each year ending in 2, beginning in 2022 and every 10 years thereafter, the City Council shall establish a special committee tasked with reviewing the City Charter and recommending any changes the special committee deems necessary or desirable. The special committee shall be made up of [NUMBER] registered voters of the City, not currently holding elective office. The special committee shall file a report with the City Council within 1 year of its appointment, unless the City Council extends the one-year period by vote. Action on any proposed Charter changes shall be as authorized by law.

COMMUNICATIONS
1. A communication was received from Les Canney, regarding proposal to remove parking on Mass. Avenue.

2. A communication was received from Linda Viens, regarding eliminating parking meters.

3. A communication was received from Lisa Sebell-Nevins and William Nevins, regarding saving parking spaces on Mass. Avenue

4. A communication was received from Luis Mejias, regarding Porter Square protected bike lanes.

5. A communication was received from Macky Buck, regarding continuing with cycle lane building.

6. A communication was received from Margaret Waters, regarding Mass. Ave. parking and new bike travel lanes - perspective and experience.

7. A communication was received from Margery Davies, regarding Proposals Addressing Climate Change Feb 7 2022 -- COF#4 COF#5 PO#2.

8. A communication was received from Mark Goldberg, regarding the Mass. Avenue Mess.

9. A communication was received from Mark Goldberg, regarding update #8 or so.

10. A communication was received from Mark Steffen, regarding changing the Bicycle Safety Ordinance.

11. A communication was received from Martha Poehler, regarding Porter Square Safety Improvement Project.

12. A communication was received from Mary Baine Campbell, regarding bike safety in Porter Square neighborhood.

13. A communication was received from Mary T. Botosh, regarding parking on Mass. Ave.

14. A communication was received from Matt Goldstein, regarding building protected bike lanes in Porter Square.

15. A communication was received from Melissa Heller, regarding Protected Bike Lanes in Porter Square.

16. A communication was received from Mike Rosenberg, regarding Quick Build from Dudley to Alewife.

17. A communication was received from Nate Kaufman, regarding THANK YOU for ensuring protected bike lanes come to Porter Square.

18. A communication was received from Neal Chaudhuri, regarding building protected bike lanes around Porter Square.

19. A communication was received from Young Kim, regarding FY23 Budget Concerns re Cycling Safety Ordinance Implementation.

20. A communication was received from Neil and Margot Goodwin, regarding Mass. Ave., Porter Square traffic/bike lanes.

21. A communication was received from Young Kim, regarding Cameras going up at Churchill and Mass Ave.

22. A communication was received from Steve Dickman, regarding please change timelines to allow time for study of traffic in north Cambridge.

23. A communication was received from Mason Mills, regarding Bicycle Safety Ordinance.

24. A communication was received from Nell S. Hawley, regarding keeping Upland Road a two-way street.

25. A communication was received from Lee Farris, regarding Cambridge Residents Alliance letter on Characteristics Sought in New City Manager.

26. A communication was received from Nina Alonso Hathaway, regarding saving Mass. Ave.

27. A communication was received from Leah Strauss, regarding City Manager We need a contemporary thinker!.

28. A communication was received from Lawrence G. Cetrulo, regarding City Manager Search.

29. A communication was received from Oliver Wunsch, regarding support for bike lanes.

30. A communication was received from Lauren C. Blanda, regarding do not approve plan to remove parking on Massachusetts Ave.

31. A communication was received from Lauraine Boccone, regarding In support of protected bikelanes in Porter Square.

32. A communication was received from One Hwang, regarding protected bike lanes for Porter Square.

33. A communication was received from Laura Jillian Gray, regarding we must build protected bike lanes in Porter Square on schedule.

34. A communication was received from Peter Dutilloy, regarding removing public parking from commercial areas to put in protected bike lanes.

35. A communication was received from Kristine Jelstrup, regarding FY23 Budget - Extra Staffing to take on Climate Change.

36. A communication was received from Kris Bayne, regarding Porter Square Redesign.

37. A communication was received from Randi Frank, regarding the City Manager search.

38. A communication was received from Ken PierceI, regarding support protected bike lanes in and around Porter Square.

39. A communication was received from Randi Frank, regarding the City Manager.

40. A communication was received from Seth Pate, regarding support for Porter Square Bike Lanes.

41. A communication was received from Karen Rao, regarding please submit as a Communication to be read at Monday's City Council Meeting.

42. A communication was received from Sharon Cerny, regarding Comprehensive traffic and Parking Plan for Cambridge.

43. A communication was received from Karen Rao, regarding Mass Ave parking.

44. A communication was received from Sharon Mombru, regarding Porter Square safety improvements.

45. A communication was received from Sheli Wortis, regarding the City Manager search.

46. A communication was received from Julia Sharpe, regarding Protected bike lanes in Porter Square.

47. A communication was received from Sonali Duggal, regarding Porter Square bike lanes.

48. A communication was received from Stephen H. Kaiser, regarding protected bike lanes.

49. A communication was received from Julia Lemieux, regarding Save Parking on Mass Ave.

50. A communication was received from Judy Hikes, regarding Proposals Addressing Climate Change Feb 7 2022 -- COF#4 COF#5 PO#2.

51. A communication was received from Steve Adeff, regarding shortsighted changes to parking and traffic changes on Mass Ave.

52. A communication was received from Judy Bright, regarding Oppose making Upland Rd. one-way.

53. A communication was received from Jonathan Haar, regarding Avon Hill Fast Build Bike lane.

54. A communication was received from Steve Horner, regarding Support for Bike Lanes and Road-Calming Measures.

55. A communication was received from Jonah Harris, regarding End Parking Minimums.

56. A communication was received from Steve Miller, regarding building protected bike lanes in Porter Square on schedule.

57. A communication was received from Joan Pickett, regarding Porter Square Safety Improvement Project.

58. A communication was received from Susan Labandibar, regarding Porter Square Safety Improvement Project - Roseland St. to Beech St.

59. A communication was received from Joan Pickett, regarding It was just after 3:00pm today..

60. A communication was received from Joan D. Krizack, regarding MassAve4 Cycling Safety Ordinance Project.

61. A communication was received from Suzanne Preston Blier, regarding City Manager Search Considerations from the Cambridge Citizens Coalition.

62. A communication was received from Jennifer Payette, regarding Mass Ave Bike Lane Project.

63. A communication was received from Jennifer McSweeney, regarding Mass Ave. plans between Porter and Harvard businesses.

64. A communication was received from Tracy Barbaro, regarding Cambridge bike safety plan to work for all.

65. A communication was received from Jeffrey Peterson, regarding Porter Square Safety Improvement Project.

66. A communication was received from Jeanne Petropoulos, regarding PORTER SQUARE.

67. A communication was received from James Mahoney, regarding Please Save the Parking and the Businesses on Mass Ave.

68. A communication was received from Tracy Barbaro, regarding slowing down and re-evaluating Porter Square Bike Lanes and effects on local businesses.

69. A communication was received from Jae Storozum, regarding Support Porter Square Bike Infrastructure!.

70. A communication was received from Ian Orbinson, regarding Hutchinson Please build Porter Square protected bike lanes.

71. A communication was received from Heather Hetherington, regarding Heather Hetherington Traffic plans for Mass Ave.

72. A communication was received from Glover Taylor, regarding Proposed changes to Mass Ave north of Harvard Square.

73. A communication was received from Gleb Bahmutov, regarding Writing in strong support of protected bike lanes around Porter Square.

74. A communication was received from Gayle DeBay, regarding Reconsider the extent of making the small businesses close and suffer.

75. A communication was received from Frederico Muchnik, regarding I do not approve of the proposed plan to remove the parking on Mass Ave.

76. A communication was received from Frank Scibilia, regarding Bike lanes in Porter Square.

77. A communication was received from Eric Silva, regarding I support protected bike lanes in and around Porter Square.

78. A communication was received from Emma Haselhuhn, regarding Public Parking is Necessary.

79. A communication was received from Elizabeth Greywolf, regarding Redesign of North Cambridge Mass Ave.

80. A communication was received from Elizabeth Greywolf, regarding making Upland Road one way.

81. A communication was received from Elaine DeRosa, regarding Opposition to Donovan Petition.

82. A communication was received from Ed White, regarding MassAve4 Cycling Safety Ordinance Project.

83. A communication was received from Doreen Kelly-Carney, regarding Deeply concerned about the Bicycle Safety Ordinance and changes to Mass Ave.

84. A communication was received from Don Abrams, regarding Proposed Redesign of Massachusetts Avenue - Porter Square Segment.

85. A communication was received from Diane Reposa, regarding Mass. Ave Bike Safety.

86. A communication was received from Derek Kerins, regarding Opposed-MassAve4 Cycling Safety Ordinance Project - Dudley to Beech and Roseland to Waterhouse.

87. A communication was received from Dena Feldstein Brody, regarding oppose Policy Order #9.

88. A communication was received from Dana Tighe, regarding Save Mass Ave.

89. A communication was received from Cynthia Hughes, regarding NC stakeholders Update #8 or so.

90. A communication was received from Claire Moore, regarding Bicycle Safety Ordinance.

91. A communication was received from Christine Tullius, regarding Upland Road Change Proposal.

92. A communication was received from Chemi Kadete, regarding Teen Cyclist Mows Down Elderly Pedestrian in Cambridge Crosswalk.

93. A communication was received from Charlie and Linda Keefe, regarding Save Mass Ave.

94. A communication was received from Charisse Taylor, regarding Please Build Protect Bike Lanes in Porter.

95. A communication was received from Carol Birnbaum, regarding Plans for Mass Ave.

96. A communication was received from Bill Walsh, regarding has our local government lost their collective minds. Mass. Ave.

97. A communication was received from Beth Gamse, regarding Mass Ave.

98. A communication was received from Belinda Rathbone, regarding Porter Square bike lane proposals.

99. A communication was received from Becky Sarah, regarding Please support the Green New Deal for Cambridge.

100. A communication was received from Becca Schofield, regarding In Support of the Revitalization of Jefferson Park.

101. A communication was received from Barbara Glick, regarding MASS AVE CORRIDER.

102. A communication was received from Barbara Bliss, regarding Upland Road proposal.

103. A communication was received from Arks Smith, regarding Mass Avenue parking issues.

104. A communication was received from Arks Smith, regarding Porter Square Safety Improvement Project.

105. A communication was received from Ann Elliott-Holmes, regarding Altering deadline for Mass Ave Cycling Safety Ordinance Project.

106. A communication was received from Andy’s Diner, regarding Andy’s Diner Mass Ave.

107. A communication was received from Andrew Solomon, regarding City Manager Search.

108. A communication was received from Andrew Ray, regarding Public comment re POR 4 9 from council meeting 27.

109. A communication was received from Allan Sadun, regarding Budget allocation for affordable housing.

110. A communication was received from Allan Sadun, regarding A Better Cambridge letter on City Manager search.

111. A communication was received from Alex Rubin, regarding Support for Protected Bike Lanes in Porter Square.

112. A communication was received from Alex Epstein, regarding Looking forward to protected bike lanes in Porter Square--on schedule.

113. A communication was received from Aaron Ross, regarding Raise the Smoking Age to 25.

---

114. Sundry communications were received from, regarding Policy Order #11, Landmarks.

115. Sundry communications were received from, regarding City Manager search.

116. Sundry communications were received from, regarding Policy Orders #11 and #3.

117. Sundry communications were received from, regarding Policy Order #5 Bike Lanes.

118. Sundry communications were received from, regarding Parking Minimums.

119. Sundry communications were received from, regarding Policy Order #3.

120. Sundry communications were received from, regarding HEART.

121. A communication was received from Young Sim, regarding Life 2/15/2022.

122. A communication was received from William Dines, regarding POR 2022 #35.

123. A communication was received from Timothy O’Donnell, regarding Opposition to Policy Order #11 and #3; Support Policy Order #10.

124. A communication was received from Sue Wentworth, regarding Upcoming votes.

125. A communication was received from Stephanie Guirand, Sandy Middleton, Louise Parker, Lee Farris, Cathy Hoffman, Carolyn Magid, and Andy Nash, regarding ARPA Funding.

126. A communication was received from Sharon Stichter, regarding Action Alert - The Ugly the Bad and the Good.

127. A communication was received from Phyllis Simpkins, regarding Monday night City Council meeting.

128. A communication was received from Pamela Winters, regarding Opposition to policy orders 11, 3, and 10.

129. A communication was received from Nancy Woods, regarding Comments on #6 Proposed Intersection to honor Janet Axelrod.

130. A communication was received from N. Theodosiou, regarding PETITION from 931 Massachusetts Ave RESIDENTS.

131. A communication was received from Mary Canner, regarding Policy 10.

132. A communication was received from Marilee Meyer, regarding AGAINST #35 CONSERVATION DISTRICT AMENDMENTS.

133. A communication was received from Marie Elena Saccoccio, regarding Letter in response to Amendment to Chapter 2.78 entitled Historical Buildings and Landmarks #35.
a. Marie Elena Saccoccio Letter in response to Amendment to Chapter 2.78 entitled Historical Buildings and Landmarks#35
b. Marie Elena Saccoccio massachusetts_state_historic_preservation_plan_021411
c. Marie Elena Saccoccio Hancock Village I LLC v Town of Brookline (1)
d. Marie Elena Saccoccio Bagalay v Avon Hill Neighborhood Conservation District Commission 2004 MBAR 532 Mass Super 2004 (1)

134. A communication was received from Marc Holzer, regarding Proposed Elimination of Neighborhood Conservation Districts.

135. A communication was received from Kristine Jelstrup, regarding Yet another dire warning from the UNIPCC.

136. A communication was received from Kit Haines, regarding Objection to Lifting Mask Mandate.

137. A communication was received from Kavish Gandhi, regarding ARPA Meeting 32.

138. A communication was received from K. Gormley, regarding Do the right thing on Policy Orders.

139. A communication was received from Janie Katz-Christy, regarding Thank you for making - and keeping Cambridge a leader in providing options for sustainable healthy transportation.

140. A communication was received from James Zall, regarding more housing less parking less NCD misuse (CR #3 PO #11 @ 22822 Council meeting).

141. A communication was received from Gabriela Romanow, regarding Please consider.

142. A communication was received from Ellen Levine, regarding Policy Order #11, Policy Order #3, Policy Order #10.

143. A communication was received from Elizabeth Houghteling, regarding No on Policy Orders 3 and 11.

144. A communication was received from Cosette Ayele, regarding Support Cambridge HEART in receiving ARPA Funds.

145. A communication was received from Charles Harrington, regarding Strong Support for Policy Order POR 2022 #29.

146. A communication was received from Charles Franklin, regarding Today's Comments.

147. A communication was received from Cathie Zusy, regarding 2.28.22 CZ re Crowe Petition.

148. A communication was received from Caroline Bruzelius, regarding City planning.

149. A communication was received from Carol Fishman, regarding comment City Council review of Loren Crowe petition.

150. A communication was received from Annette Osgood, regarding Comments to the Finance Committee Please enter as Public Record.

151. A communication was received from Anne Lowell, regarding Proposed changes to Neighborhood Historic Commissions.

152. A communication was received from Andrew Solomon, regarding support for Policy Orders.

153. A communication was received from Allan Sadun, regarding CDD capacity and studies. PLACED ON FILE [Unanimous] a. Allan Sadun CDD capacity and studies.

---

2. Thanks to Anne Shuhler and the entire Classic Graphx team for more than 35 years of exemplary service to the people and businesses of Cambridge.   Councillor Simmons

R-2     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS

WHEREAS: The City Council has recently learned that Classic Graphx, a copy and graphics business that has been a part of Central Square for more than 35 years, will be closing its doors and merging its operations with Fenway Group at the end of February; and

WHEREAS: Whether the jobs placed to them have been large or small, simple or complex, or – as was surely often the case – placed with extreme urgency, owner Anne Shuhler and her staff placed a premium on providing their clients with top notch, professional service with a smile, and they won legions of admirers in the process, becoming a truly valued presence in Central Square over the decades, and they shall be missed; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record thanking Anne Shuhler and the entire Classic Graphx team for more than 35 years of exemplary service to the people and businesses of Cambridge; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to Anne Shuhler on behalf of the entire City Council.

8. That the City Council go on record thanking Izzy Maldonado and his family for over 41 years of serving up some of the finest comfort food in Cambridge at Izzy’s Restaurant & Sub Shop, and in wishing the family well as the beloved institution passes into memory.   Councillor Simmons

R-8     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS

WHEREAS: It has recently been announced that Izzy’s Restaurant, a staple in Cambridge for over 41 years, and a beloved Port institution since relocating there in 1988, has officially closed its doors and ceased operations; and

WHEREAS: Over the decades, Izzy Maldonado, his wife Carmen, and their family have served up tasty dishes, wide smiles, and the ability to make everyone who comes in feel like they’re a part of the family, and Cambridge has been truly enriched and enlivened by this now-iconic restaurant in our community; and

WHEREAS: Izzy’s Restaurant shall forever be warmly remembered by all those who ate their delicious food, who met up there to socialize, and who felt more connected with one another through their associations with the restaurant, and it shall be greatly missed in the years to come; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record thanking Izzy Maldonado and his family for over 41 years of serving up some of the finest comfort food in Cambridge at Izzy’s Restaurant & Sub Shop, and in wishing the family well as the beloved institution passes into memory; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to Izzy Maldonado and his family on behalf of the entire City Council.

11. Happy 80th Birthday wishes to Peter Valentine.   Councillor Zondervan

R-11     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN

WHEREAS: It has come to the attention of the City Council that longtime resident Peter Valentine recently celebrated his 80th birthday; and

WHEREAS: Peter has dedicated his life to keeping Cambridge, the Commonwealth, the United States, the World, and the Universe safe and in balance with his electromagnetic arts, intentional thinking and breathing, and constant vigilance; and

WHEREAS: Peter has contributed many excellent civic ideas over the years, including the photo mural at Graffiti Alley and more recently coining the name “Starlight Square”; and

WHEREAS: Peter’s wisdom, whimsy, and kind spirit are appreciated by everyone who gets to know him; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record wishing Peter Valentine a very happy 80th birthday and wishing him many more happy and healthy years; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to prepare a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution for Peter Valentine on behalf of the entire City Council.

12. Resolution in support of potential Green Line extension to Porter Square.   Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui
Resolution Adopted 9-0

R-12     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI

WHEREAS: It has recently come to the attention of the City Council that Eversource is working on figuring out the path and getting permits for a major installation of electrical cables from Allston/Brighton through East Cambridge to Union Square, where they are expanding the substation across from the new Union Square Green Line station; and

WHEREAS: The Massachusetts GLX [Green Line Extension] commitment to the federal government included that a potential connection of the GLX to Porter Square would not be precluded, and it is in the interest of the City of Cambridge that the commitment be honored; and

WHEREAS: Any location of infrastructure by a utility company should not interfere with any future public transit needs, particularly ones that have been planned and under consideration for more than a decade; now therefore be it

RESOLVED: That City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution of strong support for ensuring a possible Green Line connection to Porter Square in the future to Eversource, the Governor, the Secretary of Transportation, our state house delegation and all other relevant officials as appropriate.

3. The Ordinance Committee met on Dec 15, 2021, to conduct a public hearing on the Off Street Parking Zoning petition (Ord #2021-23) [Report not available]
Present: unknown - no report
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0 (even though there was no report)

A. A Zoning Petition has been received from Karen Cushing, regarding Off Street Parking consistent with the base zoning district, in order to minimize the use of on-street parking in the surrounding area (Ordinance #2021-23). (AP21#44)
Motion to Refer to a 2nd Reading Fails 0-9

2. A communication was received from Councillor Simmons, transmitting a memorandum regarding Final Report of the Cambridge Advisory Committee on City Art, Monuments, & Markers. (COF22#21)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Re: Final Report of the Cambridge Advisory Committee on City Art, Monuments, & Markers

Dear Mr. Clerk:

Please include this correspondence on the agenda as part of Communications and Reports from City Officers for the City Council meeting being held on Feb 28, 2022. In April 2019, I sponsored a policy order calling for a full accounting of local streets, schools, and public buildings that may be named in honor of those who had ties to the American slave trade. The order’s intent was not to erase our city’s sometimes complicated history, but rather to allow us to more honestly confront our history and the questions of how we shape and share our community narrative – and to consider how it shapes us. Thus began a process that, while delayed by the global pandemic that descended upon us in early 2020, is now yielding a report on how the City might better engage with our history, our narratives, and how we tell our story going forward. I proudly present the attached Final Report of the Cambridge Advisory Committee on City Art, Monuments, & Markers for submission to the City Manager for further consideration and action. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
City Councilor E. Denise Simmons

3. A communication was received from Councillor Nolan and Councillor Carlone regarding FY24 budget priorities. (COF22#22)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

To: Cambridge City Council
From: Councillors Patricia Nolan and Dennis Carlone
Date: 2/24/2022
Subject: Budget Goals

To the Honorable City Council:

At a meeting of the Finance Committee held Feb 16, 2022, continued to Feb 23, 2022, the goal and call of the meeting was to gather input into next year’s budget from the City Council and from the public. The Council had passed a policy order March 29, 2021, with the intention to have council meetings in anticipation of budget formation. That policy order led to scheduling this Finance Committee meeting, to establish a collaborative joint process of budget development for the future.

We recognized that the goals of the City Council [listed below] are not specific and are broad enough that it would be difficult to determine how the Council would expect and want the city budget to reflect the goals. The goals should be discussed, refined, reviewed, and updated before the FY24 budget in order to facilitate planning and coherence.

As Co-Chairs, we agreed to summarize what we heard in order to have a brief summary of the priorities as outlined in the meeting. As we reviewed the notes of the meeting, there were six areas that appeared to have consensus that should be incorporated into planning for next year’s budget:

Priorities of the council with reference to FY23 budget:

• Continued investment in affordable housing, including movement towards fulfilling the request for a major investment via a housing bond

• Universal PreSchool/PreK: All 4 years have access to a free, high-quality program

• Attention to the social services needs of vulnerable populations, including the unhoused

• Climate Emergency/Environmental Justice investment to match the need and urgency

• Progress on Municipal Broadband and Digital Equity

• Open space and tree canopy expansion, especially in areas of the city most vulnerable to heat island

Council Goals:

Goal 1: Increase access to affordable housing for all income groups.

Goal 2: Ensure that Cambridge offers economic and educational opportunity to all.

Goal 3: Deepen our commitment to sustainable use of energy and strengthen our capacity for resilience.

Goal 4: Expand and deepen community engagement.

Goal 5: Develop a more proactive, inclusive, and transparent city planning process.

Goal 6: Make it easy to move safely through the city, especially by sustainable modes of transportation.

Goal 7: Increase opportunities for all residents to enjoy the City’s open spaces.

Goal 8: Ensure that Cambridge remains an Innovation Hub that integrates businesses of all sizes into a thriving ecosystem.

Goal 9: Improve Council’s capacity to collaborate more effectively, make better decisions, and increase its accountability to the public.

Goal 10: Ensure City’s budget allocates resources responsibly and responsively.

Goal 11: Ensure Public Safety efforts reflect current and emerging challenges and opportunities in a way that incorporates Cambridge’s core values.

Goal 12: Eliminate Bias within the City workplace and wider community.

TEXT OF ORDERS
O-1     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
ORDERED: That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider the request for a street corner dedication in honor of Reuben Nathaniel Dottin, Jr. in the vicinity of Hews Street and Western Avenue; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward this order to the Dedication Committee for their review and approval.

O-2     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
WHEREAS: It has come to the attention of the City Council that Ronald "R-Jay" Jones has just marked 50 years of working at the Cambridge Community Center; and
WHEREAS: Born in Cambridge and a lifelong resident of the Coast, Ronald “R-Jay” Jones graduated from Rindge Tech and would go on to attend Boston State College, where he majored in physical education; and
WHEREAS: Ronald “R-Jay” Jones is known for building community through his annual neighborhood summer cookouts, for his delicious cooking, and for his reputation as a skilled basketball player; and
WHEREAS: Ronald “R-Jay” Jones first came to work at the Cambridge Community Center on Feb 21, 1972, and through his work at “the Center” – where he has held a variety of different roles, including Group Leader, Program Director, Site Coordinator, Chef, and Building Manager, and where he has long been instrumental in helping to coordinate the Center’s Annual Thanksgiving Luncheon – it is calculated that R-Jay has impacted the lives of more than 5,000 children and their families
WHEREAS: While Ronald “R-Jay” Jones has never sought out the spotlight, his half century of service is such a momentous anniversary, and it is only fitting that his extraordinary contribution to the Cambridge community be recognized and celebrated; now therefore be it
RESOLVED: That the City Council go on record thanking Ronald “R-Jay” Jones for his 50 years of service at the Cambridge Community Center, and in declaring Feb 28, 2022 to be designated as Ronald “R-Jay” Jones Day in the City of Cambridge; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward a suitably engrossed copy of this resolution to Ronald “R-Jay” Jones on behalf of the entire City Council.

O-3     Feb 28, 2022  Charter Right - Zondervan
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
COUNCILLOR TONER
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
WHEREAS: In the five years since Massachusetts legalized recreational cannabis, a handful of Host Community Agreements (HCAs) have been issued by the City of Cambridge to Economic Empowerment and Social Equity applicants seeking to establish local recreational dispensaries, yet to date, only one business has been able to open their doors; and
WHEREAS: A variety of factors have contributed to the slow start of establishing local recreational dispensaries, including but not limited to the significant costs associated with obtaining licenses, securing product, securing and holding retail space during an international pandemic, and the hiring and training of staff; and
WHEREAS: The two-year delay caused by the Covid-19 pandemic has presented a particularly difficult challenge for local Equity Empowerment (the “EE”) and Social Equity (the “SE”) applicants to navigate, as those who secured retail space two or more years ago in anticipation of offsetting their monthly rent with their monthly profits have instead had to absorb two years’ worth of rent without any sales to offset these costs, threatening the fiscal viability of some these fledgling enterprises; and
WHEREAS: Another significant cost has been the local “Impact Fees,” which the City defines in all its HCAs as “…the amount of three percent (3%) of the Applicant’s gross revenues derived from the Cannabis Business’ sales…[because]…[t]he Parties anticipate that, as a result of the Applicant’s operation of the Cannabis Business, the City will incur additional expenses and impacts upon its road system, law enforcement, inspectional services, permitting services, administrative services, educational services and public health services, in addition to potential unforeseen impacts upon the City,” and these fees must be paid to the City on an annual basis; and
WHEREAS: Massachusetts has collected $74.2 million from cannabis sales as of December 2021, the excise tax of 10.75% on recreational cannabis comprising only about half of the total tax revenue being collected for cannabis, as there is also a 6.25% state sales tax, plus the local tax (the Impact Fees) of up to 3% of gross revenue, which all added up to $208 million in total tax revenue last fiscal year; and
WHEREAS: Due to substantial and negative impact of the 3% local tax (Impact Fees) on the viability of these EE and SE Cannabis Dispensaries, and in light of the supporting evidence from other Massachusetts municipalities that the removal of these Impact Fees would not have any appreciable impacts upon the community or add significant additional costs to the City, it would be a small but significant action if the City were to remove or reduce this additional financial hurdle for local EE and SE applicants, in an effort to support the viability of these businesses during such uncertain times for brick and mortar businesses; and
WHEREAS: The City Council has repeatedly declared its strong support for creating favorable conditions that would provide EE and SE applicants with the greatest chances for success, and to that end it would be just and equitable for the City to reduce the Impact Fee imposed upon its EE and SE applicants from 3% of Gross Revenue to .05% of Gross Revenue; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to amend all existing Host Community Agreements previously issued by the City by reducing the Impact Fee to 0.05% of Gross Revenue and to refrain from placing this burden upon any future HCAs that may yet be issued, unless supporting evidence is provided by the City showing a finding that it incurred additional expenses and impacts upon its road system, law enforcement, inspectional services, permitting services, administrative services, educational services and public health services greater than the .05% of Gross Revenue collected from all the EE and SE dispensaries annually; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter no later than May 1, 2022.

O-4     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
WHEREAS: Over the course of the last 24 months there has been an increase in gun activity between youth in Cambridge and Somerville; and
WHEREAS: This gun activity has led to injury and death and has resulted in increased fear in our neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS: It will take a collective effort and strategy to address the root causes of this violence and to increase safety among our youth and in our communities; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the Mayor be and hereby is requested to schedule a Special Meeting of the City Council and invite the Mayor of Somerville, Somerville City Councillors, the Cambridge Police Department, the Somerville Police Department, and others to discuss how to work together to address the gun activity taking place between our youth in our communities.

O-5     Feb 28, 2022  Amended
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
VICE MAYOR MALLON
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR TONER
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
WHEREAS: The roll out and implementation of separated bike lanes has caused a lot of concern among the small business community who have felt left out of the process; and
WHEREAS: Business owners have fears about the impact on their businesses, and it would be beneficial for both the City and the business community to have local economic information about the potential impacts, positive and negative, on various types of businesses; and
WHEREAS: Economic studies are often cited from other cities about the impact of bike lanes to small businesses, and how they will improve sales; and
WHEREAS: The City will be implementing bike lanes along business corridors each year until 2026 per the recent ordinance change, this provides an opportunity to collect relevant data and real time experience; and
WHEREAS: Having local information will help shape future conversations and implementations of separated bike lanes and can help inform needed mitigation strategies along commercial corridors; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Economic Development division and other appropriate departments with the intention of conducting a study to collect relevant economic data relating to business impacts from bike lane installations [now and for a full year once the bike network is completed], positive or negative, which will help inform future installations of bike lanes along commercial corridors; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with appropriate departments on what the standard public process will be prior to implementing new sections of bike lanes consistent with the Cycling Safety Ordinance, and what general evaluation process will take place post-installation, and to report back to the City Council on these matters; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on these matters by Mar 31, 2022.

O-6     Feb 28, 2022
VICE MAYOR MALLON
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
WHEREAS: Janet Axelrod sadly passed away on December 26, 2021; and
WHEREAS: Janet dedicated her life to bettering the lives of others around her through co-founding the South Africa Partners, working at the Haymarket Fund, serving as a longtime Chair of the Trustees of the Cambridge Public Library, and more; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the Executive Assistant to the City Council be and hereby is requested to confer with the Dedication Committee to consider this request for a suitable dedication in honor of Janet Axelrod in the vicinity of Broadway and Trowbridge Street; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward this order to the Dedication Committee for their review and approval.

O-7     Feb 28, 2022
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge is currently in the process of a City Manager search; and
WHEREAS: In an effort to ensure we have a preliminary candidate screening process that is balanced, there is a desire to have more than one member of the City Council select self-nominated candidates for the preliminary screening committee; and
WHEREAS: To respond to this concern, it has been determined that an ad-hoc committee can be formed from members of the City Council to appoint members to the candidate preliminary screening committee; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That an ad-hoc committee of the Cambridge City Council be formed for the purpose of reviewing and selecting self-nominated residents and stakeholders to be on the candidate preliminary screening committee with the following four (4) City Council members: Councillor Azeem, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toner, and Councillor Zondervan; and be it further
ORDERED: That the ad-hoc committee confers with the Law Department prior to any meeting to discuss confidentiality and Open Meeting Law issues; and be it further
ORDERED: That the ad-hoc committee complete their work by Mar 28, 2022.

O-8     Feb 28, 2022
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
COUNCILLOR CARLONE
WHEREAS: Cambridge is home to a large Haitian community who contribute to the workforce, economy, and cultural vibrancy of the city; and
WHEREAS: On Mar 25, 2020, the Trump Administration initiated a deportation policy under a public health law that restricts immigration at the United States-Mexican border based on an unlawful invocation of the Public Health Act under Title 42 of the U.S Code (“Title 42”) in violation of U.S. constitutional law and international law; and
WHEREAS: The Biden Administration has continued the immigration policies of the Trump Administration, further ramping up deportations, leading to mass expulsions of Haitians under Title 42; and 
WHEREAS: Haitian migrants are unable to make claims for asylum as required under U.S. law and international law; and
WHEREAS: The deportations under the guise of Title 42 have only escalated, with the U.S. government deporting nearly 14,000 Haitian migrants since September 2021, totaling more than 17,000 Haitian migrants deported to Haiti since the beginning of the Biden Administration; and
WHEREAS: On Thurs, Feb 3, 2022, the Biden Administration chose to extend its practices of deportation under Title 42, despite widespread opposition from human rights groups, public health officials, elected officials, and asylum advocates; and
WHEREAS: Migrants are forced to return to a Haiti rife with political, social, and economic instability and are often at a greater risk of kidnappings, abuse, and violence, and the State Department’s travel advisory to U.S. citizens regarding travel currently states “Do not travel to Haiti due to kidnapping, crime, civil unrest, and COVID-19”; and
WHEREAS: This country has a legal and moral obligation under its own laws, and international laws and treaties, to receive migrants in distress in search of relief and refuge, thus measures restricting access to asylum must not be allowed to become entrenched under the guise of public health; and
WHEREAS: The City Council went on record in 2021 opposing these actions, but the Biden Administration has continued to use Title 42 to justify these racist deportations; and
WHEREAS: President Biden has expressed his commitment to reverse Trump-era immigration policies and build a humane immigration system; now therefore be it
RESOLVED: That the Cambridge City Council calls for the Federal Government to reverse Title 42 and immediately halt the deportation of Haitian migrants, thereby allowing them to seek due process through our legal system to make claims for legal status.

O-9     Feb 28, 2022
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
WHEREAS: Dr. Andre Gabor Borda, a renowned mathematician and professor at MIT, immigrated to the US from Hungary after the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and moved to Cambridge in 1978; and
WHEREAS: Dr. Borda has touched the lives of so many throughout the City, especially his colleagues in the field of mathematics at MIT and Harvard; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider the request from Councillor Azeem for a suitable location to dedicate a street corner in honor of Dr. Andre Gabor Borda; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward this order to the Dedication Committee for their review and approval.

O-10     Feb 28, 2022  Charter Right - Simmons
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR AZEEM
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
WHEREAS: Riverbend Park (temporary closure of Memorial Drive from Western Avenue to Gerry’s Landing Road) is cherished by residents of all ages and abilities as a safe and outstanding recreation option during seasonable weather; and
WHEREAS: In 2021, Riverbend Park opened on April 10 and remained open on Saturdays and Sundays from 11:00am to 7:00pm throughout the summer and fall; and
WHEREAS: Many residents have expressed an interest in expanding Riverbend Park east of Western Avenue so that it is more accessible to residents living in the denser neighborhoods of the eastern half of the city; and
WHEREAS: Exploration of an eastward expansion is particularly in order ahead of the upcoming renovation project that will likely impact access to the park as it is currently established for several years; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with DCR to establish a 2022 schedule for Riverbend Park that includes weekly Saturday and Sunday closures starting no later than April 2, if not sooner; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with DCR to pilot an expansion of Memorial Drive closures along any segments east of Western Avenue that could be used as parkland, as a matter of equity; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter no later than the Mar 28, 2022 Regular Meeting.

O-11     Feb 28, 2022  Amended, Referred to NLTP
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
COUNCILLOR SIMMONS
VICE MAYOR MALLON
WHEREAS: In 2021, several residents attempted to file amendments to Chapter 2.78 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Historical Buildings and Landmarks” (Ordinance #2021-12).
WHEREAS: The proposal expired at the conclusion of the 2020-2021 City Council legislative session. Now therefore be it
ORDERED: That Section 2.78.140 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Purpose”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.149 Purpose

The City Council finds it necessary to enact this article under Section 6 of the Home Rule Amendment in order to preserve, conserve and protect the beauty and heritage of the City and to improve the quality of its built environment through identification, conservation and maintenance of neighborhoods, areas, sites and structures which constitute or reflect distinctive features of the architectural, cultural, political, economic or social history of the City in balance with allowing housing growth in all City neighborhoods to welcome a diverse set of residents; to foster appropriate use and wider public knowledge and appreciation of such neighborhoods, areas or structures; and by furthering these purposes to promote the public welfare by making the City a more attractive, desirable, affordable, diverse, equitable, accessible and inclusive place in which to live and work. To achieve these purposes, the City may designate neighborhood conservation districts and landmarks to be administered as set forth in this article.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.160 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Neighborhood conservation district commission—Established—Membership requirements”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.160 Neighborhood conservation district commission—Established—Membership requirements.

A. Upon designation as provided in Section 2.78.180 of this article of any neighborhood conservation district, and unless the designation provides that the Historical Commission itself shall exercise authority with respect thereto, the City Manager shall appoint a neighborhood conservation district commission to consist of five members and three alternates whose composition fairly represents the diversity of the neighborhood itself. The members shall include at least three residents of the neighborhood, two of whom shall be tenants and one of whom shall be a homeowner; one neighborhood property owner (who may or may not be a neighborhood homeowner); and one person who owns and/or operates a business within the neighborhood. One member and/or one alternate of a neighborhood conservation district commission may be a Cambridge resident who lives outside the district. The neighborhood conservation district commission shall act solely in the exercise of those functions described in this article which are applicable to the district under its administration. A member of the Historical Commission staff should be assigned to provide ongoing administrative and operational support to the neighborhood conservation district commission.

B. The members of the neighborhood conservation district commission shall be appointed by the City Manager with regard to the diversity of the district. Such members shall serve for a term of three years, except that the initial appointments shall be for one member to serve one year and one member to serve two years, and vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term of office. Each member and alternate shall continue in office for up to six months after expiration of his or her term until a successor is duly appointed and qualified, except that no member shall serve more than two consecutive terms.

C. The neighborhood conservation district commission shall elect annually a Chair and Vice-Chair from its own number. In the case of absence, inability to act, or unwillingness to act because of self-interest on the part of a member, his or her place shall be taken by an alternate member designated by the Chair, if available, otherwise by the Vice-Chair if available, otherwise by a majority vote of the members and alternate members of the Commission present. The person exercising the function of Executive Director of the Historical Commission shall serve as secretary of each neighborhood conservation district commission. Persons serving as members or alternate members of a neighborhood conservation district commission shall, as a result of such service, be considered as "special municipal employees" for purposes of Chapter 268A of the General Laws.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.170 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Powers and duties”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.170 Powers and duties.

The Historical Commission and each neighborhood conservation district commission shall have like powers, functions and duties with respect to each landmark and neighborhood conservation district over which it has jurisdiction as is provided Historic District Commissions under clauses (a) through (g) under Section 10 of Chapter 40C of the General Laws with respect to historic districts, including without limitation with respect to the approval and disapproval of certificates of appropriateness, non-applicability and hardship, the dating and signing of such certificates, the keeping of records and adoption of rules and regulations, the filing with the City Clerk and Building Department of certificates and determinations of disapproval by it, and the determination of designs of appurtenances (excluding colors) which will meet the requirements of the landmark or neighborhood conservation district. The Historical Commission and each neighborhood conservation district commission shall have no powers, functions or duties with respect to, or jurisdiction over, affordable housing projects that either are developed under the Affordable Housing Overlay, as defined in Section 11.207 of the Zoning Ordinance, or have a majority of their units permanently reserved for households at or below 100% of Area Median Income.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.180(C) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

C. In the case of a landmark, the report shall be prepared by the Historical Commission. In the case of a neighborhood conservation district, the report shall be prepared by a study committee consisting of five persons appointed by the City Manager, including at least one person who resides in the district under consideration, at least one person who owns property in the district under consideration, at least one person who owns and/or operates a business within the district under consideration, and at least one person who rents in the district under consideration.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.180(D) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

D. Any thirty registered voters of the City may petition that the Historical Commission initiate, or the Historical Commission on its own may initiate, the process of designating a landmark or amending or rescinding any such designation theretofore made. Any one hundred registered voters of the City may petition that the Historical Commission initiate the process of designating a neighborhood conservation district or amending or rescinding any such designation theretofore made. The Commission shall within forty-five days following the filing of such request or petition hold a preliminary hearing and arrange for the preparation of a report and, if required, request the appointment of a study committee. In the event the Commission requests the appointment of a study committee, the approval of the formation of such committee shall be by order of the City Council. If the Commission declines to request the appointment of a study committee, it must make its recommendation as to whether or not to designate the landmark or neighborhood conservation district within forty-five days of the original petition or request for that designation. The Historical Commission shall not reconsider a proposed designation, amendment or rescission of designation within ten years of its previous hearing thereon. No later than forty-five days after the transmittal of a report to the Commission pertaining to a proposed designation, the Commission shall hold a public hearing. The Commission shall give not less than thirty days notice of such public hearing by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and by mailing notice thereof to the owner of the proposed landmark and to every owner abutting the proposed landmark or within the proposed neighborhood conservation district, each such owner to be determined from the then current records of the Assessing Department, to the residents of every address within the proposed neighborhood conservation district, and to the City Manager, the Planning Board and the City Clerk.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.180(F) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

F. The recommendation of the Historical Commission with regard to any designation, amendment or rescission shall be transmitted to the City Manager and to the City Clerk with a copy of the approved designation report. Along with its recommendation, the Historical Commission shall include a report on the impact of the designation on housing and renovation costs in the district and a letter from each business association within, or within 500 yards of, the proposed district setting out their views on the proposed district, and the Historical Commission shall identify opponents to the proposed district and allow them to submit a letter setting out their views on the proposed district and a counter-proposal to the CHC's recommendation. Designation of a landmark or a neighborhood conservation district or amendment or rescission of designation shall be by order of the City Council. In the case of a designation, the order shall include a statement of the reasons for such designation and a statement of standards which the Historical Commission or neighborhood conservation district commission is to apply under Sections 2.78.170 and 2.78.190 through 2.78.220 of this article.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.180(I) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

I. Following acceptance of a designation petition for a landmark by the Historical Commission, no application for a building permit for new construction or alterations on the premises of a property being considered for designation shall be granted until reviewed by the Commission as though the property were designated as a landmark under this Article III. Following acceptance of a designation petition for a neighborhood conservation district by the Historical Commission and authorization of a study of the appropriateness of that designation by order of the City Council, and until (a) the Historical Commission makes a negative recommendation on a proposed designation, (b) the City Council determines not to enact the proposed designation, or (c) one year has elapsed, whichever is less, the Commission shall conduct a non-binding review of all proposed construction, demolition, or alteration that affects the exterior architectural features, other than color, climate resiliency features, or renewable energy features, of the structures on the premises of a proposed landmark or within a proposed neighborhood conservation district. The period during which these rules and procedures apply may not be extended other than due to a declared emergency.

ORDERED: That a new paragraph (K) be inserted into Section 2.78.180 to include following text:

K. Beginning in 2022, and every ten years thereafter, the City Council shall review each existing neighborhood conservation district and adopt an order (1) to renew the neighborhood conservation district unchanged; (2) to renew the neighborhood conservation district with more limited boundaries; (3) to renew the neighborhood conservation district with less restrictive rules and/or guidance; or (4) to discontinue the neighborhood conservation district. In the review process, the City Council shall revise the rules and/or guidance to conform with the current version of this ordinance, including setting a schedule for conformance of neighborhood conservation district commissions, upon vacancies, to the current membership requirements. In the absence of a City Council order renewing a neighborhood conservation district, the neighborhood conservation district shall be discontinued.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.190(A) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Review procedures”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.190 Review procedures.

A. Except as the order designating or amending a landmark or neighborhood conservation district may otherwise provide in accordance with this article, the Historical Commission or neighborhood conservation district commission having jurisdiction shall review all construction, demolition or alteration that affects the exterior architectural features, other than color, climate resiliency features, or renewable energy features, of any landmark or within any neighborhood conservation district.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.190(B)(2) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2. Alterations to the exterior of existing structures that do not increase or diminish the size and location of windows and doors, cause the removal of any bay, porch, hood, window or door casing or any other protruding decorative element, or alter the appearance of a roof;

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.210(C) of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance be deleted and replaced with the following text:

C. No building permit for alteration of an exterior architectural feature of a landmark or construction of a structure or for alteration of an exterior architectural feature within a neighborhood conservation district and no demolition permit for demolition or removal of a landmark or of a structure within a neighborhood conservation district shall be issued by the City or any department thereof until the certificate required by this article has been issued by the Historical Commission or neighborhood conservation district commission having jurisdiction. This provision does not apply to proposals for, or existing, affordable housing projects that either are developed under the Affordable Housing Overlay, as defined in Section 11.207 of the Zoning Ordinance, or have a majority of their units permanently reserved for households at or below 100% of Area Median Income, over which neither the Historical Commission nor any neighborhood conservation district commission has jurisdiction.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.220 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Factors considered by Commissions”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.220 Factors considered by Commissions.

A. In passing upon matters before it, the Historical Commission or neighborhood conservation district commission shall consider, among other things, the historic and architectural value and significance of the site or structure, the general design, arrangement, texture and material of the features involved, and the relation of such features to similar features of structures in the surrounding area. In the case of new construction or additions to existing structures a commission shall consider the appropriateness of the size and shape of the structure both in relation to the land area upon which the structure is situated and to structures in the vicinity. A Commission shall not consider interior arrangements or architectural features not subject to public view.

B. A Commission shall not make any recommendation or requirement except for the purpose of rejecting proposals incongruous to the historic aspects or the architectural significance of the landmark or neighborhood conservation district.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.240 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Appeal procedure”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.240 Appeal procedure

Any person aggrieved by a designation of a landmark or district may appeal to the superior court within thirty days after such designation. Any applicant aggrieved by a determination of a neighborhood conservation district commission or ten registered voters of the City opposing a determination under this article may appeal to the Historical Commission within sixty days after the filing of the notice of such determination with the City Clerk. The Historical Commission may overrule the determination and return it for reconsideration consistent with that finding. If the applicant is aggrieved by the determination of the Historical Commission, or if action is not taken by the Historical Commission within thirty days of filing for review, the applicant may appeal to the superior court. Appeal from a Historical Commission determination shall be taken within thirty days of the formal decision; appeal from a failure to act shall be taken within sixty days after the filing for review. The superior court may reverse a determination if it is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. In all other respects, the appeal shall be made in the same manner as provided under Section 12A of Chapter 40C of the General Laws.

ORDERED: That Section 2.78.270 of the Cambridge Code of Ordinance, entitled “Enforcement and remedies”, be deleted and replaced with the following text:

2.78.270 Enforcement and remedies

The Historical Commission is specifically authorized to institute any and all actions, proceedings in law and in equity, as it deems necessary and appropriate to obtain compliance with the requirements of this article or to prevent a threatened violation thereof. Any violation of any provision of this article may be punished to the like extent provided in Section 13 of Chapter 40C of the General Laws for a violation of said Chapter 40C. In addition to the foregoing, no building permit shall be issued, with respect to any premises upon which a landmark or a structure within any neighborhood conservation district has been voluntarily demolished otherwise than pursuant to a certificate granted after compliance with the provisions of this article, for a period of two years after the date of the completion of such demolition (the word "premises" for the purposes of this sentence referring to the parcel of land upon which the demolished structure was located and all adjoining parcels of land under common ownership or control.)

O-12     Feb 28, 2022
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to light City Hall blue and yellow this week in honor of Ukraine.