Cambridge City Council meeting - September 20, 2021

Cambridge City Council meeting - September 20, 2021 - AGENDA
[DC,AM,PN,SS,TT,QZ in person; MM,DS,JSW remote]

CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA
1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the recommendations of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) for FY2022.
19 Orders Adopted; Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Sept 20, 2021
To the Honorable, the City Council:

Listed below are the recommendations of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) for FY2022. For additional information, please see attachments from the CPA Committee Chair, David Kale, dated Sept 15, 2021.

The CPA process included a virtual public hearing held on June 12, 2021 to solicit proposals and ideas on CPA projects for FY2022. A second virtual public hearing was held on July 14, 2021 to solicit recommendations on the percentage of CPA funds allocated to each funding category: Affordable Housing, Historic Preservation, and Open Space. The CPAC also received several online submissions and emailed comments regarding potential CPA projects and the allocation percentages. The CPAC, on Sept 14, 2021, voted unanimously for an allocation of 80% for Affordable Housing, 10% for Historic Preservation projects and 10% for Open Space projects.

In accordance with the CPAC’s recommendations, I am requesting that the City Council appropriate a total of $17,510,000 in CPA funds raised by the City's FY2022 CPA surcharge, the FY2021 state match funds received in FY2022 and a portion of the existing CPA Fund Balance.

For this appropriation, it is estimated that the net local receipts from the CPA surcharge for FY2022 will total $11,200,000, added to an anticipated FY2021 state match of $4,200,000 and an additional $2,110,000 from CPA Fund Balance. Additionally, $10,000 from CPA Fund Balance will go to the City’s annual membership in the Community Preservation Coalition.

On Sept 14, 2021 the CPAC made recommendations for allocation of these FY2022 funds. The CPAC recommended to the City Council, through the City Manager, that the CPA funds be allocated and appropriated as follows:

VOTE 1: Fiscal Year 2022 Local Funds ($11,200,000)

Vote 1A
80% of FY2022 CPA Local Fund revenues ($8,960,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (DS - Absent)

Vote 1B
10% of FY2022 CPA Local Fund revenues ($1,120,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $520,000 appropriated to the Lombardi Municipal Building, Roof Replacement
Order Adopted 9-0

2. $600,000 appropriated to the Historic Preservation Grants
Order Adopted 9-0

Vote 1C
10% of FY2022 CPA Local Fund revenues ($1,120,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $40,000 appropriated to the Alewife Restoration
Order Adopted 9-0

2. $5,000 appropriated to the Bare Root Nursery Expansion, Fresh Pond
Order Adopted 9-0

3. $1,075,000 appropriated to the Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park, Design & Partial Construction
Order Adopted 9-0

VOTE 2: Fiscal Year 2021 State Funds [received in FY2022] ($4,200,000)

Vote 2A
80% of FY2021 State Match revenues ($3,360,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust
Order Adopted 9-0

Vote 2B
10% of FY2021 State Match revenues ($420,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $67,000 appropriated to the Architectural Survey Digitization, Phase IV
Order Adopted 9-0

2. $173,000 appropriated to the City Record Digitization
Order Adopted 9-0

3. $165,000 appropriated to the Flagstaff Park Flagpole Restoration
Order Adopted 9-0

4. $15,000 appropriated to the Lombardi Municipal Building, Roof Replacement
Order Adopted 9-0

Vote 2C
10% of FY2021 State Match revenues ($420,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $120,000 appropriated to the Bare Root Nursery Expansion, Fresh Pond
Order Adopted 9-0

2. $150,000 appropriated to the Magazine Beach, Sunken Parking Lot Removal & Grassy Beach Creation
Order Adopted 9-0

3. $150,000 appropriated to the Rafferty Park, Design
Order Adopted 9-0

VOTE 3: CPA Fund Balance ($2,100,000)

Vote 3A
80% of the Fund Balance ($1,680,000) allocated to Affordable Housing and appropriated to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust
Order Adopted 9-0

Vote 3B
10% of the Fund Balance ($210,000) allocated to Historic Preservation as follows:

1. $10,000 appropriated to the Flagstaff Park Flagpole Restoration
Order Adopted 9-0

2. $200,000 appropriated to the Winthrop Wall Restoration, Construction.
Order Adopted 9-0

Vote 3C
10% of the Fund Balance ($210,000) allocated to Open Space as follows:

1. $210,000 appropriated to the Rafferty Park Design
Order Adopted 9-0

VOTE 4: CPA Fund Balance - Administration ($10,000)

Vote 4A
1. $10,000 appropriated to Administrative Costs for Community Preservation Coalition membership dues
Order Adopted 9-0

TABLE 1. Summary of FY2022 Recommended Appropriations by Expenditure Type

Affordable Housing	$14,000,000

Historic Preservation
Architectural Survey Digitization, Phase IV	$67,000
City Record Digitization	$173,000
Flagstaff Park Flagpole Restoration	$175,000
Lombardi Municipal Building, Roof Replacement	$535,000
Historic Preservation Grants	$600,000
Winthrop Wall Restoration, Construction	$200,000
Subtotal (Historic Preservation)	$1,750,000

Open Space
Alewife Restoration	$40,000
Bare Root Nursery Expansion, Fresh Pond	$125,000
Magazine Beach, Sunken Parking Lot Removal & Grassy Beach Creation	$150,000
Rafferty Park, Design	$360,000
Raymond Street (Corcoran) Park, Design & Partial Construction	$1,075,000
Subtotal (Open Space)	$1,750,000

Administration/ Community Preservation Coalition	$10,000
Grand Total	$17,510,000

TABLE 2. Summary of Recommended Appropriations by Funding

	FY2022 Local Funds	FY2021 State Funds	CPA Fund Balance	FY2022 Total
Affordable Housing Trust	$8,960,000	$3,360,000	$1,680,000	$14,000,000
Historic Preservation Projects	$1,120,000	$420,000	$210,000	$1,750,000
Open Space Projects	$1,120,000	$420,000	$210,000	$1,750,000
Admin./Community Preservation/Coalition Membership Dues			$10,000	$10,000
Total	$11,200,000	$4,200,000	$2,110,000	$17,510,000

I request the appropriation of funds recommended by the CPAC.

Very truly yours,
Louis A. DePasquale
City Manager

2. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of of $5,000 received as a donation from Stonyfield Farms, Inc. to the Grant Fund Public Works Department Other Ordinary Maintenance account which will be used toward the costs of natural turf management practices by the Department of Public Works at City parks and fields.
Order Adopted 9-0

3. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $199,736.56 received from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Shared Streets and Spaces Program Grant, to the Grant Fund Traffic, Parking, and Transportation Extraordinary Expenditures account ($199,736.56) which will be used to fund the installation of two new Bluebikes stations, as well as the installation of a new curb extension to create space for one of the new stations.
Order Adopted 9-0

4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a request for approval to submit an amendment to the proposed Home Rule Petition for a special law regarding a fire cadet program for the City of Cambridge Fire Department.
Order Adopted 9-0; Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Sept 20, 2021
To the Honorable, the City Council:

I am writing to request your approval to submit the attached amendment to the proposed Home Rule Petition for a special law regarding a fire cadet program for the City of Cambridge Fire Department. As background, on February 22, 2021, the City Council approved Council Order No. 6 confirming that it favored the filing of a Petition for a Special Law Regarding a Fire Cadet Program for the City of Cambridge Fire Department (“Fire Cadet Legislation”) in a similar manner to the act which authorizes City of Cambridge police cadets, Chapter 679 of the Acts of 1979 (“Police Cadet Legislation”).

The Police Cadet Legislation was enacted in the aftermath of a 1979 case called Castro v. Beecher, in which approximately 90 municipalities in the Commonwealth were subject to federal civil rights litigation involving their practices in hiring police officers, and which required specific groupings of police candidates at the time. Based upon the order in that case, the Police Cadet Legislation included language stating that if “any federal or state, administrative or court order requires the listing of candidates in separate groups, each group to be listed according to the laws of the commonwealth, then this act shall be subject to such listing.” Chapter 679 of the Acts of 1979, at Section 2.

The proposed Fire Cadet Legislation, attached to Council Order No. 6 of 2/22/2021, included similar language in Section 4 of such proposed legislation since it was modeled after the Police Cadet Legislation. However, because the compelled groupings which related to the court order in Castro v. Beecher are no longer applicable, and because it is implied that the City would have to follow such inapplicable court order, inclusion of Section 4 in the proposed Fire Cadet Legislation is superfluous and could create confusion. These changes do not substantively affect the proposed Legislation.

I am therefore requesting your approval to remove Section 4 from the proposed Fire Cadet Legislation. I have attached a tracked changes version of the proposed amended Fire Cadet Legislation, as well as a clean copy for your review and consideration.

Very truly yours,
Louis A. DePasquale
City Manager

PETITION FOR A SPECIAL LAW RE: FIRE CADET PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. The appointing authority in the City of Cambridge authorized to appoint firefighters for the City of Cambridge may appoint as a fire cadet, for a period of full-time “on the job” training, any citizen resident of Cambridge who is not less than eighteen nor more than twenty-three years of age who meets the physical qualifications required of applicants for appointment as a firefighter in Cambridge, and who is determined by the appointing authority to be of good moral character.

Such appointment shall not be subject to the civil service laws or rules; nor shall a fire cadet be entitled to any benefits of such civil service laws or rules. Such appointment may be terminated with or without cause by the appointing authority at any time, and shall be terminated whenever a cadet fails to maintain a passing grade in any course of study the appointing authority determines they should undertake, or when he or she reaches the age of twenty-five. A fire cadet shall receive such compensation and such leave with pay as the appointing authority shall determine. No person shall be too old for appointment as a cadet if they were of qualifying age at the time of qualification to the cadet program. An appointment to the cadet program shall not be terminated for age unless the cadet has completed two years of service.

SECTION 2. A fire cadet shall participate in classroom training and cooperative education and training designed to educate and prepare the cadet to become a permanent firefighter. Cadets will not replace, substitute or interfere with collectively bargained duties currently being performed by Cambridge firefighters, but may assist Cambridge firefighters in the performance of any of their administrative or other duties They shall be considered an employee of the City of Cambridge for the purposes of workers’ compensation and shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter forty-one, section 111F of the General Laws. No fire cadet shall be entitled to the benefits of the City’s then existing collective bargaining agreement that covers permanent firefighters in the City.

SECTION 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter thirty-one of the General Laws, any person who has completed not less than two years of service as a fire cadet under this act may, subject to a program established by the City’s appointing authority and approved by the personnel administrator of the human resources division within the Commonwealth’s executive office for administration and finance (“Personnel Administrator”), be appointed by the City’s appointing authority to fill a vacancy in a position in the lowest grade in the fire force of the City of Cambridge without certification from an eligible list prepared under the provisions of chapter thirty-one of the General Laws; provided, however, that such person either is on a fire entrance eligible list prepared under said chapter thirty-one or passes a qualifying examination to be given by the Personnel Administrator.

SECTION 4. If any federal or state law, administrative or court order requires the listing of candidates in separate groups, each group to be listed according to the law of the Commonwealth, then this act shall be subject to such listing.

SECTION 4. Not more than 33 1/3 percent of the total number of appointments to the regular fire force of the City of Cambridge in any calendar year shall be made pursuant to this Act. The appointing authority of the City of Cambridge shall report in writing forthwith to the Personnel Administrator in said division of personnel administration any appointment made under the provisions of this act.

SECTION 5 6. This act shall take effect upon its passage and after affirmative majority vote of the Cambridge City Council.

Filed on: __________________

PETITION FOR A SPECIAL LAW RE: FIRE CADET PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. The appointing authority in the City of Cambridge authorized to appoint firefighters for the City of Cambridge may appoint as a fire cadet, for a period of full-time “on the job” training, any citizen resident of Cambridge who is not less than eighteen nor more than twenty-three years of age who meets the physical qualifications required of applicants for appointment as a firefighter in Cambridge, and who is determined by the appointing authority to be of good moral character.

Such appointment shall not be subject to the civil service laws or rules; nor shall a fire cadet be entitled to any benefits of such civil service laws or rules. Such appointment may be terminated with or without cause by the appointing authority at any time, and shall be terminated whenever a cadet fails to maintain a passing grade in any course of study the appointing authority determines they should undertake, or when he or she reaches the age of twenty-five. A fire cadet shall receive such compensation and such leave with pay as the appointing authority shall determine. No person shall be too old for appointment as a cadet if they were of qualifying age at the time of qualification to the cadet program. An appointment to the cadet program shall not be terminated for age unless the cadet has completed two years of service.

SECTION 2. A fire cadet shall participate in classroom training and cooperative education and training designed to educate and prepare the cadet to become a permanent firefighter. Cadets will not replace, substitute or interfere with collectively bargained duties currently being performed by Cambridge firefighters, but may assist Cambridge firefighters in the performance of any of their administrative or other duties They shall be considered an employee of the City of Cambridge for the purposes of workers’ compensation and shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter forty-one, section 111F of the General Laws. No fire cadet shall be entitled to the benefits of the City’s then existing collective bargaining agreement that covers permanent firefighters in the City.

SECTION 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter thirty-one of the General Laws, any person who has completed not less than two years of service as a fire cadet under this act may, subject to a program established by the City’s appointing authority and approved by the personnel administrator of the human resources division within the Commonwealth’s executive office for administration and finance (“Personnel Administrator”), be appointed by the City’s appointing authority to fill a vacancy in a position in the lowest grade in the fire force of the City of Cambridge without certification from an eligible list prepared under the provisions of chapter thirty-one of the General Laws; provided, however, that such person either is on a fire entrance eligible list prepared under said chapter thirty-one or passes a qualifying examination to be given by the Personnel Administrator.

SECTION 4. Not more than 33 1/3 percent of the total number of appointments to the regular fire force of the City of Cambridge in any calendar year shall be made pursuant to this Act. The appointing authority of the City of Cambridge shall report in writing forthwith to the Personnel Administrator in said division of personnel administration any appointment made under the provisions of this act.

SECTION 5. This act shall take effect upon its passage and after affirmative majority vote of the Cambridge City Council.

Filed on: __________________

Agenda Item Number 4 Sept 20, 2021

WHEREAS: On February 22, 2021, the City Council went on record favoring the filing of a Home Rule Petition entitled: PETITION FOR A SPECIAL LAW REGARDING A FIRE CADET PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT; and

WHEREAS: The proposed Home Rule Petition included language which is no longer relevant and which should be removed from the proposed Home Rule Petition; now therefore be it

ORDERED: That the City Council go on record favoring the filing of the attached amended Home Rule Petition entitled: PETITION FOR A SPECIAL LAW REGARDING A FIRE CADET PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE FIRE DEPARTMENT

CHARTER RIGHT
1. An application was received from Paulo Correia, requesting permission for a curb cut at the premises numbered 851 Cambridge Street; said petition has received approval from Inspectional Services, Traffic, Parking and Transportation, Historical Commission and Public Works. No response has been received from the neighborhood association. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey in Council Sept 13, 2021]
Tabled 9-0 (Toomey)

ON THE TABLE
2. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-13, regarding next steps on implementation of Universal Pre-K. [Placed on the Table in Council May 17, 2021]

3. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-41, regarding a report on closing Mass Ave from Prospect Street to Sidney Street on Friday and Saturday evenings. [Charter Right Exercised by Councillor McGovern in Council June 28, 2021; Tabled in Council Aug 2, 2021]

4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-56, regarding improvements to Jerry's Pond and along Rindge Avenue. [Placed on the Table by Mayor Siddiqui in Council Sept 13, 2021]

UNFINISHED BUSINESS
5. That the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge be amended to allow the service of postoperative care for a dog (Ordinance #2021-16). [Referred to Committee in Council June 28, 2021; Passed to a Second Reading in Council Sept 13, 2021; To Be Ordained on or after Sept 27, 2021]

COMMUNICATIONS
1. A communication was received from Young Kim, regarding Emergency Policy Order to delay Mass Ave Safety Improvement Project - Dudley St to Alewife Brook Pkwy.

2. A communication was received from Young Kim, regarding Emergency Policy Order to delay Mass Ave Safety Improvement Project - 2nd forwarded email.

3. A communication was received from Hasson Rashid, regarding 2020 Annual-Report.

4. A communication was received from James Harder, Morgan Memorial Goodwill Industries, regarding Clarification from Goodwill regarding letter.

5. A communication was received from Theodora M. Skeadas, regarding writing in support of the Green New Deal Zoning Petition!

6. A communication was received from Steve Wineman, regarding support the Cambridge Green New Deal proposal.

7. A communication was received from Stephanie Guirand, regarding Stephanie Guirand support for PO #5 to increase the linkage fee.

8. A communication was received from Sheli Wortis, regarding support for Policy Order 5.

9. A communication was received from Sarah White, regarding Public comment Green New Deal zoning petition.

10. A communication was received from Young Kim, regarding Re Emergency Policy Order to delay Mass Ave Safety Improvement Project - Dudley St to Alewife Brook Pkwy.

12. A communication was received from Mary Verhage, regarding Cambridge Green Proposal.

13. A communication was received from Louise Parker, regarding PO #5 Increasing the linkage fee.

14. A communication was received from Louise Parker, regarding Cambridge Green New Deal.

15. A communication was received from Leslie Brunetta, regarding Green New Deal.

16. A communication was received from Lee Farris, regarding Cambridge Residents Alliance supports increasing linkage fee PO #5.

17. A communication was received from Kavish Gandhi, regarding Support for PO#5.

18. A communication was received from Jonathan Behrens, regarding support for increasing the linkage fee.

20. A communication was received from Hasson Rashid, regarding I wanted you to see this article.

21. A communication was received from C. Catherine LeBlanc, regarding Green New Deal for Cambridge.

22. A communication was received from Bill McAvinney, regarding please pass PO #5.

23. A communication was received from Ellie Best, regarding GND Zoning Petition.

24. A communication was received from Andrew F Bellows, regarding The Importance of the Green New Deal Zoning Petition.

25. A communication was received from Allan Sadun and Becca Schofiel, regarding Support for PO#5.

26. A communication was received from Alana Kramer Gómez, regarding Cambridge needs a Green New Deal.

2. Resolution congratulating Kathryn Fenneman. Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Nolan

3. Resolution congratulating Ben Clark. Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Simmons, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler

4. That the City Council go on record congratulating the Benjamin Banneker School on it’s 25th anniversary. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui

5. An Act Relative To Language Access and Inclusion. Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Simmons

ORDERS
1. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct the Community Development Department, the City Solicitor, and other appropriate City staff to compile a report detailing the efforts the City has made toward creating LGBTQ+-Friendly Housing over the past decade, to state what impediments had been identified in realizing this effort, and to outline recommendations for how the City may successfully create such housing within the next three years. Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0

2. That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider a suitable dedication in honor of Marine Corps Lance Corporal Roger Michael Hurd, who was Killed in Action and awarded the Purple Heart for his service in the Vietnam War. Councillor Toomey
Order Adopted 9-0

3. That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider the request from Kate Rubin for a bench dedication at Danehy Park in honor of John Haydon. Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

4. That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to work with the Public Health Department and report back to the City Council on the milestones that will be used to determine when the indoor mask mandate will no longer be needed. Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

5. That section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 of the Zoning Ordinance, regarding the linkage fee, be amended by substitution. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern
Referred to Housing Committee, Ordinance Committee, and Planning Board 9-0 as Amended

6. Council Support of H.926, The Massachusetts Schoolchildren Pesticide Protection Act. Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

7. That the City Council urges the US Congress to fulfill its obligation to prevent nuclear war, as outlined in the Back from the Brink campaign. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0 as Amended

8. That the City Council go on record in support of Darwin’s UNITED. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0 as Amended

9. That the City Council schedule a hearing of the Ordinance Committee for the purposes of amending the Ordinance of the City of Cambridge regarding MUNICIPAL BUILDING PERMITS and WAGE THEFT. Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern
Referred to Ordinance Committee 9-0

COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee met on July 14, 2021 to discuss car storage policies in Cambridge.
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS FROM CITY OFFICERS
1. A communication was received from City Clerk, Anthony I. Wilson, transmitting memorandums from City Solicitor, Nancy E. Glowa regarding Minor Correction to Ballot Question No. 3 Which Is to be Placed on the Nov 2, 2021 Ballot Pursuant to Calendar Item No. 3 of 6/28/21. [Note: Date of Election Day corrected – RW]
Amended text Approved 9-0; Report Placed on File 9-0

From: Office of the City Solicitor
To: City Clerk Anthony I. Wilson
Date: September 20, 2021
Re: Minor Correction to Ballot Question No. 3 Which Is to be Placed on the November 3 2, 2021 Ballot Pursuant to Calendar Item No. 3 of 6/28/21

Dear Mr. Wilson:

I am submitting this as a communication to the City Council for inclusion on the Monday, September 20, 2021 agenda. Kindly ensure that it is on the agenda for the Council's consideration at that meeting.

At the City Council meeting of September 13, 2021 , there was discussion about the language that would be included on the ballot pursuant to the above referenced Calendar Item, a copy of which is attached for your information, and it became clear that the Law Department had misunderstood exactly what would be included in the summary of the ballot questions that would appear on the ballot in this matter. Therefore, the Law Department has prepared an amended version of the summaries of all three ballot questions for submission to the Election Commission which includes the full language of each Ballot Question as voted upon by the City Council on June 28, 2021 as well as the summaries the Law Department had previously drafted.

In addition, in the course of our preparation of the new summaries, we realized that while Ballot Question Number 2 proposes adding a new Section 116(a) to the City's Charter at G.L. c. 43, Section 116, and Ballot Question Number 3 proposes adding a new Section 116(b) to the City's Charter at G.L. c. 43, Section 116, it is not clear what the numbering should be in Section 116 if Question Number 2 fails, and if Question Number 3 is adopted by the voters.

Therefore, we propose that the City Council authorize making the following clerical amendment to Ballot Question Number 3: in the first paragraph after the words "by adding a new Section 116(b )", adding the words "or, if Question 2 fails, by adding a new Section 116( a.)" I have attached hereto the revised text of the Ballot Questions and Summaries that now includes the full text of the language the City Council adopted in Calendar Item No. 3 of 6/28/21 in redlined form which shows the proposed amendment to Ballot Question No. 3. The revised text of the Ballot Questions and Summaries will be forwarded to the Election Commission for inclusion on the Ballot upon the Council's determination of whether to approve the proposed amendment to Ballot Question No. 3.

I respectfully request that the Council approve the proposed amendment to Ballot Question No 3.

Very truly yours,
Nancy E. Glowa
City Solicitor

The City Council has proposed making three changes to the City’s Plan E Charter, which is the law that prescribes the structure of the Cambridge government. The Charter sets forth the powers of the City Council and the City Manager.

The City Council voted on June 28, 2021 that three charter amendments shall be submitted to the voters at the election on November 2, 2021 in the following form:

1. Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter, Section 105 of Chapter 43, be made providing for the City Council to confirm appointments of the City Manager to the City’s boards and commissions, which confirmation is not currently required? YES___ NO ___

Summary of proposal: The City Council’s first proposed change would amend the City’s Plan E Charter at General Laws Chapter 43, Section 105 by adding the following:

“The City Manager shall refer to the City Council and simultaneously file with the Clerk the name of each person the City Manager desires to appoint or reappoint as a member of a board or commission. Appointment of a member of a board or commission made by the City Manager will be effective upon a majority vote of the city council, which vote shall occur within 60 days after the date on which notice of the proposed appointment was filed with the City Clerk. The appointment may be approved or rejected by a majority of the full City Council before 60 days. An appointment or reappointment shall take effect if the City Council fails to act within those 60 days.”

This proposed change would limit the City Manager’s existing Charter power to make appointments to the City’s many boards and commissions by adding a requirement to the Charter that each appointment and re-appointment by the City Manager to boards and commissions be subject to approval by a majority vote of the City Council. Just a few examples of the boards and commissions that this change would affect are the Planning Board, the Board of Zoning Appeal, the Historical Commission, the Human Rights Commission, and the Conservation Commission. The City Manager’s proposed appointments and re-appointments would take effect without City Council approval if the City Council fails to act by either approving or rejecting a proposed appointment or re-appointment within 60 days.

2. Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter be made providing for the City Council to establish a process for an annual review of the City Manager’s performance? YES ___ NO ___

Summary of proposal: The City Council’s second proposed change would amend the City’s Plan E Charter at General Law Chapter 43, Section 116 by adding the following as a new Section 116(a):

“Annually the City Council shall prepare and deliver to the City Manager a written review of the City Manager’s performance in a manner provided by ordinance.”

This proposed change to the City Charter would require the City Council to enact an ordinance that would require an annual written review of the City Manager’s performance. Pursuant to the existing Charter, the City Council is the hiring and firing authority of the City Manager, but the City Council is not required to prepare an annual written performance review of the City Manager. If this Charter change is adopted, the City Council would be required to establish a process by ordinance that would prescribe the manner by which the City Council would be required to perform an annual written performance review of the City Manager.

3. Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter be made providing for the City Council to establish a process for review every 10 years to be made of the City’s Plan E Charter by an appointed committee of voters per city council ordinance? YES ___ NO ___

Summary of proposal: The City Council’s third proposed change would amend the City’s Plan E Charter at General Laws Chapter 43, Section 116 by adding the following as a new Section 116(b) or, if Question 2 fails, by adding a new Section 116(a.):

“Not later than July 1, in each year ending in a 2, the City Council shall provide for a review to be made of the city charter by a special committee to be established by ordinance. All members of the special committee shall be voters of the city not holding elective office. The special committee shall file a report with the City Council within 1 year of its appointment recommending any changes to the city charter which it deems necessary or desirable, unless an extension is authorized by vote of the City Council. Action on any proposed charter changes shall be as authorized by the Massachusetts constitution or general laws.”

This change to the City Charter would require that the City Council enact an ordinance that provides for a review of the Charter by a committee of City voters, none of whom could hold elective office, every ten years beginning in 2022. The appointed committee would file a report with the City Council within one year of its appointment unless the City Council extended the one-year period, recommending any changes to the Charter which the committee deemed necessary or desirable. The committee would not have the authority to actually make the Charter changes it might propose. Action on any proposed Charter changes could only be taken subject to Massachusetts law governing how Charter changes may be enacted.

O-2 June 21, 2021 [Adopted June 28, 2021]
COUNCILLOR NOLAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR SOBRINHO-WHEELER
COUNCILLOR CARLONE

WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge, which adopted the Plan E Charter in 1940, has not once held a formal review process to consider revisions, making it one of the only municipalities in Massachusetts to go 80 years without reviewing its most important legal document; and

WHEREAS: On July 27th, 2020, the City Council unanimously passed a Policy Order asking the Mayor to call a Special Meeting for the Collins Center for Public Management to present to the Council on the process and benefits of charter review; and

WHEREAS: The Special Meeting on September 23, 2020, discussed charter review and options for charter change, which was followed by a policy order requesting an appropriation, which led to two memos produced by the Collins Center outlining the processes for charter review and reform, including specific discussion of reviewing the appointment process for multiple member boards, instituting an annual review of the City Manager and instituting a regularly scheduled charter review; and

WHEREAS: Memos outlining possible changes to the charter based on the Collins Center review project, which included interviewing all Councillors, were on the City Council meeting agenda on March 22, 2021, on the meeting agenda on May 3, 2021, and were the sole topic of the Special Meeting on June 2, 2021, whose purpose was the charter review and possible change; and

WHEREAS: Several ideas for possible charter changes were discussed at the Special Meeting, with the public and the City Council able to express opinions on the possible paths laid out by the Collins Center memo; and

WHEREAS: In many cities and towns in Massachusetts, the charter is reviewed and updated at regular intervals; and

WHEREAS: In many cities and towns in Massachusetts, including Watertown, Somerville, Newton, Chelsea, Framingham, Amherst, and Northampton, the City or Town Council has a role in appointing and/or approving department heads and/or multiple-member boards; and

WHEREAS: The City has the authority to submit a home rule petition to adopt or revise its charter or to amend its existing charter by special act; now therefore be it

ORDERED: That the City Council go on record favoring the filing of the attached Home Rule Petition entitled: AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE TO INCLUDE A BALLOT QUESTION ON THE NOVEMBER 2, 2021 MUNICIPAL BALLOT RELATIVE TO THE HOME RULE CHARTER.

SECTION 1. The Charter of the City of Cambridge is hereby amended by special act to add the following to the City’s existing Plan E Charter at General Laws Chapter 43, which was adopted pursuant to its acceptance of the provisions of General Laws Chapter 43, Sections 93-116, Section 105 on Appointments:

The City Manager shall refer to the City Council and simultaneously file with the Clerk the name of each person the City Manager desires to appoint or reappoint as a member of a board or commission. Appointment of a member of a board or commission made by the City Manager will be effective upon a majority vote of the city council, which vote shall occur within 30 days after the date on which notice of the proposed appointment was filed with the City Clerk. The appointment may be approved or rejected by a majority of the full City Council before 30 days.

SECTION 2. The Charter of the City of Cambridge is hereby amended by a special act adding a new Subsection 116 (a) to the City’s existing Plan E Charter, which was adopted pursuant to its acceptance of the provisions of General Laws Chapter 43, Sections 93-116 on City Manager Review:

Annually the City Council shall prepare and deliver to the City Manager a written review of the City Manager’s performance in a manner provided by ordinance.

SECTION 3. The Charter of the City of Cambridge is hereby amended by a special act by a special act by adding the following new Subsection 116 (b) to the City’s existing Plan E Charter, which was adopted pursuant to its acceptance of the provisions of General Laws Chapter 43, Sections 93-116 on Charter Review:

Not later than July 1, in each year ending in a 2, the City Council shall provide for a review to be made of the city charter by a special committee to be established by ordinance. All members of the special committee shall be voters of the city not holding elective office. The special committee shall file a report with the City Council within 1 year of its appointment recommending any changes to the city charter which it deems necessary or desirable, unless an extension is authorized by vote of the City Council. Action on any proposed charter changes shall be as authorized by the Massachusetts constitution or general laws.

SECTION 4. This act shall be submitted to the voters of the City of Cambridge at the upcoming municipal elections on November 2, 2021 in the form of the following questions which shall be placed upon the official ballot to be used at said election. If the changes are approved by a majority of valid ballots voting yes, they would go into effect as of January 1, 2022.

Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter, Section 105 of Chapter 43, be made, by special act providing for the City Council to confirm appointments of the City Manager to the City’s boards and commissions which confirmation is not currently required? YES___ NO ___

Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter be made by special act providing for the City Council to establish a process for an annual review of the City Manager’s performance? YES___ NO __

Should amendments to the City’s Plan E Charter be made by special act providing for the City Council to establish a process for review every 10 years to be made of the City’s Plan E Charter by an appointed committee of voters per City Council Ordinance? YES___ NO __

Below said question shall appear a brief summary of the act prepared by the city solicitor.

If the voters at the municipal election approve the question, then this act shall be applicable to the city as of January 1, 2022, but not otherwise.

SECTION 5. This act shall be effective upon its passage.

2. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui, communicating information from the School Committee.
Placed on File 9-0

LATE COMMUNICATION
3. A communication was received from City Clerk, Anthony I. Wilson, transmitting a communication for Brian McLane, PE – Supervising Engineer, Department of Public Works in regards to updated information for Calendar item #1 Curb Cut at the location of 851 Cambridge Street.
Placed on File 9-0

HEARING SCHEDULE
Mon, Sept 20
5:30pm City Council Meeting (Sullivan Chamber)

Tues, Sept 21
3:30pm The Ordinance committee will meet to continue a hearing on an amendment to Article 22 of the City of Cambridge Zoning Ordinance “Emissions Accounting” (Ord # 2021-13). (Remote Hearing)

Wed, Sept 29
5:30pm The Ordinance Committee will meet to discuss the Neighborhood Conservation District citizen’s petition. (Remote Hearing)

O-2 Sept 20, 2021
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
ORDERED: That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider a suitable dedication in honor of Marine Corps Lance Corporal Roger Michael Hurd, who was Killed in Action and awarded the Purple Heart for his service in the Vietnam War; 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-3 Sept 20, 2021
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
ORDERED: That the Executive Assistant to the City Council confer with the Dedication Committee to consider the request from Kate Rubin for a bench dedication at Danehy Park in honor of John Haydon; 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-9 Sept 20, 2021
COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN
MAYOR SIDDIQUI
COUNCILLOR SOBRINHO-WHEELER
COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby finds and determines that wage theft in all its various forms, including the illegal misclassification of employees as independent contractors, has become an epidemic particularly in the construction industry; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further finds and determines that the problem is so pervasive that traditional law enforcement agencies lack the resources to address it effectively, and that, as a result, municipalities have the civic responsibility to do whatever is within their power and authority to prevent such illegal practices from taking place on their own construction projects, on projects receiving building permits from the municipality, and on projects receiving municipal tax relief; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further finds and determines that wage theft is often accompanied by employer tax and insurance fraud, with employers failing to pay their payroll taxes and workers compensation premiums, and that it will not tolerate spending tax dollars or providing tax relief for construction projects being built by contractors engaging in tax fraud; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further finds and determines that, in any event, taxpayer money is most efficiently and productively spent by awarding construction contracts to, and providing tax relief for construction projects built by, reputable, honest, law-abiding firms that include and enforce provisions requiring, with respect to their own employees and those of subcontractors at all tiers, compliance with state laws governing the payment of prevailing wages and other wage and hour laws, the provision of workers compensation coverage, and the proper classification of individuals as employees and not as independent contractors, as well as state law concerning health insurance coverage; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further finds and determines that, due to the pervasiveness of wage theft in the construction industry, significant financial incentives are necessary to motivate property owners and their general contractors to take steps sufficient to ensure that wage theft does not occur on their projects; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further notes that based on a 2015 study and as reported by a recent Cambridge Community Foundation report significant economic disparities exist in the Boston Metro area, including Cambridge, that disproportionately disadvantage Black and Brown people; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council hereby further finds and determines that, based on these and other studies and reports, and based on the high level of lack of economic opportunity for Black and Brown community members, the residents of the City of Cambridge should be part of and benefit from public construction projects and projects receiving municipal permits and that, accordingly, it is appropriate to require that such projects include employment opportunities for Cambridge residents, especially Black and Brown people, women, and veterans; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Council schedule a hearing of the Ordinance Committee for the purposes of amending the Ordinance of the City of Cambridge to insert the language below:

2.66.090 MUNICIPAL BUILDING PERMITS

A. Minimum Mandatory Conditions. In addition to any other conditions that may be required in connection with the issuance of building permits, each building permit issued in connection with the construction, reconstruction, installation, demolition, maintenance or repair of any commercial building estimated to cost not less than $1,000,000 or in connection with a residential building with 4 or more units shall be subject to and shall include the following set of mandatory permit conditions:

It shall be a material condition of this Permit that any construction manager, general contractor or other lead or prime contractor, or any entity functioning in any such capacity, and any other contractor or subcontractor of any tier or other person or entity that is engaged to perform the construction work on the property that is the subject of this Permit (hereinafter, collectively and individually, the “contractor”) shall comply with the following qualifications and conditions at all times during their performance of work on the project:

1. The contractor has not been debarred or suspended from performing construction work by any federal, state or local government agency or authority in the past five years;

2. The contractor has not been found within the past five years by a court or governmental agency in violation of any law relating to providing workers compensation insurance coverage, misclassification of employees as independent contractors, payment of employer payroll taxes, employee income tax withholding, wage and hour laws, prompt payment laws, or prevailing wage laws;

3. The contractor must maintain appropriate industrial accident insurance sufficient to provide coverage for all the employees on the project in accordance with G.L. c.152 and provide documentary proof of such coverage to the Inspectional Services Department to be maintained as a public record;

4. The contractor must properly classify employees as employees rather than independent contractors and treat them accordingly for purposes of minimum wages and overtime, workers’ compensation insurance coverage, unemployment taxes, social security taxes and state and federal income tax withholding, in accordance with G.L. c.149, §148B on employee classification and any other relevant statutes, laws and ordinances;

5. The contractor must comply with G.L. c. 151, §1A and G.L. c. 149, § 148 and any other relevant statutes, laws and ordinances with respect to the payment of wages; and

6. The contractor must be in compliance with the health and hospitalization requirements of the Massachusetts Health Care Reform law established by Chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, as amended, and regulations promulgated under that statute by the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority.

If any person or entity that is subject to the foregoing fails to comply with any of the qualifications and conditions with respect to work on the project, this Permit shall be deemed temporarily suspended and all construction work on the entire project shall cease immediately upon issuance of a stop work order by the City Manager or designee until further notice.

B. Remedies. In the event the permit is granted, the applicant for the permit shall be responsible for ensuring that all contractors performing construction work on the property comply with the Minimum Mandatory Conditions required by Section 2.66.90 for the duration of work on the project. If any person or entity that is subject to those Minimum Mandatory Conditions fails to comply with any of the qualifications and conditions with respect to work on the project, and in addition to any other penalties or consequences provided by law, the City Manager or designee shall issue a stop work order with respect to all construction work on the entire project until the violation is remedied. Once the City Manager or designee determines that the violation has been remedied, the City Manager or designee shall withdraw the stop work order and construction on the project may proceed.

C. Appeals. Any person aggrieved by a stop work order issued by the City Manager or designee shall have the appeal rights set forth in Section 8.60.070 - Appeals of fines.

2.66.100 WAGE THEFT

2.66.110 – Purpose

The purpose of this chapter is to reinforce existing laws against wage theft in the City of Cambridge, and expand on them to provide the city’s workers with stronger and more easily enforceable wage and benefits protections.

2.66.120 – Powers Regarding Wage Theft

(a) The city, by and through its officials, boards and commissions, may deny an application for any license or permit issued by it, if, during the three-year period prior to the date of the application, the applicant admitted guilt or liability or has been found guilty, liable or responsible, in any judicial or administrative proceeding, of committing or attempting to commit a violation of:

1) Commonwealth of Massachusetts Payment of Wages Law, General Laws Chapter 149, Section 148, and any and all other state or federal laws regulating the payment of wages, including, but not limited to, Chapter 149, Sections 27, 27G, 27H, 52D, 148A, 148B, 150C, 152, 152A, 159C; and Chapter 151, sections 1, 1A, 1B, 15, 19 and 20 of the General Laws; and

2) The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692, or any other federal or state law regulating the collection of debt, as to the employees of the applicant or others who had performed work for said applicant.

(b) Any license or permit issued by the City of Cambridge, its boards or commissions, may be revoked or suspended if, during the three years prior to the issuance of the license or permit, the licensee or permittee admitted guilt or liability or has been found guilty or liable in any judicial or administrative proceeding of committing a violation of any of the laws set forth in subsection (a) above.

(c) Any license or permit issued by the City of Cambridge, its boards or commissions, may be revoked or suspended if the applicant, licensee or permittee is a person who was subject to a final judgment or other decision for violation of any of the laws set forth in subsection (a) above within three years prior to the effective date of this section, and the judgment was not satisfied within the lawful period for doing same, or the expiration of the period for filing an appeal; or if an appeal is made, the date of the final resolution of that appeal and any subsequent appeal resulting in a final administrative or judicial affirmation of violation of any of the laws set forth in subsection (a) above.

(d) The period of non-issuance, revocation or non-renewal shall be one year, and the licensee or permittee or the person who is the principal of a license or permit shall not again be licensed or permitted in any other manner during such period.

(e) Within 14 calendar days from the date that the notice of refusal to issue, revocation or refusal to renew notice is mailed to the applicant or licensee or permittee, the applicant, licensee or permittee may appeal such decision by filing a written notice of appeal setting forth the grounds therefor. Said notice shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. The hearing shall be conducted by the board, commission or individual who made the decision not to issue, not to renew, or to revoke within 30 days of receipt of such notice of appeal.

(f) This law shall apply to any person or entity whose final administrative decision or adjudication or judicial judgment or conviction was entered on or after 3 years before implementation], with the exception of judgments that remain unsatisfied as set forth in subsection (c) above.

(g) Application of this section is subject to applicable state or federal laws.

2.66.130 – Wage Theft Enforcement Committee

(a) Structure

1) There shall be established a Wage Theft Enforcement Committee (WTEC), comprised of no more than 15 total designees, appointed by the City Manager and approved by the City Council, with designees from relevant organizations including the building trades, service workers, other labor unions, trade organizations, nonprofits and other organizations representing labor. No less than half the committee members shall be Cambridge residents, and no less than half shall be union/labor representatives.

2) Designees of the wage theft advisory committee shall be appointed for a term of three years, notwithstanding initial appointments, and must be appointed no later than the second City Council meeting of the new year. In order to stagger the terms of the designees, the initial appointments shall be randomly divided into 3 equal cohorts with 1 year, 2 year and 3 year terms respectively. No appointee shall serve more than 2 consecutive terms in a row, regardless of term length.

(b) Duties

1) The WTEC will meet at least once every two months to review wage theft complaints and provide advice to the City Manager and City Council on the implementation and effectiveness of the wage theft ordinance.

2) In addition, each year the committee shall elect from among its members a volunteer secretary who shall receive wage theft complaints from the attorney general's office; or received by the city solicitor's office; or received by any member of the WTEC. Said secretary and/or designees of the committee shall coordinate any response to such complaint that is required by the ordinance. In addition, members of the WTEC may offer education, guidance, and referrals to employees affected by wage theft in Cambridge.

(c) Annual report. The city shall publish an annual report, through the WTEC detailing all wage theft complaints received and action taken in response to such complaints, including specifically the status or final disposition of each complaint, where available. The report shall also include civil and criminal judgments issued by the state and federal courts, administrative citations, and final administrative orders, including but not limited to debarments, against employers pursuant to M.G.L. c. 149 and M.G.L. c. 151, if known. The report shall be presented to the City Council via the City Manager’s agenda at a regular City Council meeting soon after its publication.

(d) Conflict of interest. For purposes of this division no member of the WTEC shall participate in any proceeding concerning a beneficiary, a covered vendor, or a covered employee, if the member or any member of his or her immediate family has a direct or indirect financial interest in said individual or in the award of a service contract, subcontract or assistance or the granting of relief to said individual.

2.66.140 – Wage Theft Complaint Process

(a) Filing of complaints. Anyone may file a complaint by notifying the City Manager of a violation. The City Manager, upon notification of a wage theft complaint, shall immediately notify the WTEC, the city purchasing agent, the Licensing Commission, the City Council, and the Attorney General's office of the complaint.

(b) Required communication with attorney general. On a biannual basis, a representative from the WTEC will request to meet with the office of the Attorney General to discuss complaints involving employers in the city and to better coordinate on issues of wage theft in the city.

2.66.150 – Successors in Interest

The requirements of this division, including any sanctions imposed herein, that are applicable to any employer shall also be applicable to, and effective against, any successor employer that (i) has at least one of the same principals or officers as the prior employer; and (ii) is engaged in the same or equivalent trade or activity as the prior employer.

2.66.160 – Severability

If any provision of this division, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstances, shall be enjoined or held to be invalid, the remaining provisions of this division, or the application of such provisions to persons or circumstances, other than that which is enjoined or held invalid shall be not affected thereby.

2.66.170 – Effective Date

This ordinance shall become effective on January 1, 2022.

TEXT OF COMMITTEE REPORTS
Committee Report #1
The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee met to discuss car storage policies in Cambridge.

Date: Wed, July 14, 2021, 10:00am, Remote Meeting
Present: Sobrinho Wheeler, Zondervan, Mallon
Absent: Nolan, Toomey
Also Present: Carlone

Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler called the meeting to order with the call of the meeting being Car Storage Policies in Cambridge and stated that the subject matter was raised in a Policy Order before the Council on June 7. The order requested that the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee host a meeting to discuss with city staff options to eliminate residential and commercial parking minimums citywide and add parking maximums near transit hubs. Also to be discussed are curb cut policies and residential parking permit fee structures as regards parking costs and exemptions for low-income car owners. Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler shared that despite every part of the City being within half a mile of public transit, Cambridge has some of the highest levels of traffic anywhere, with one 2019 study rating it as the worst traffic in the country. Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler stated the value per square foot going towards car storage, and other factors should be contextualized as relates to the direction the Council and the City will take with these policies.

Iram Farooq (Assistant City Manager - Community Development) introduced her department presentation stating her appreciation for a hearing with broader focus, respecting the connection between parking, zoning requirements and city operational policy. Ms. Farooq introduced the members of her team, Joe Barr, Dir. of Traffic, Parking + Transportation, Jeff Roberts, Dir. of Zoning + Development, and Stephanie Groll, Parking Transportation Demand Management (PTDM) Officer, Suzanne Rasmussen, Dir. of Environment + Transportation. Ms. Farooq was also joined by Stephanie McAuliffe and Brooke McKenna.

Jeff Roberts (Dir. of Zoning + Development) began the presentation with slides summarizing parking in Cambridge, current parking rules, current thinking in parking regulation and information about the various rules and regulations that are currently in place.

Stephanie Groll (Parking + Transportation Demand Management) shared a chart representing the decrease in parking permits per household in recent years, aligning with the City goal to reduce resident car ownership as part of its wider transportation and climate goals. Regarding Cambridge travel trends, Ms. Groll stated the ‘Moving Forward 2020’ report shows commute modes with 43% (less than half) of commuters into Cambridge driving into work alone, and 14% of Cambridge residents driving alone to work (regardless of destination), with data showing the drive alone rate decreasing (which has not been the national trend). Ms. Groll explained the PTDM ordinance as part of a long-term strategy to increase choices for getting around, prioritizing sustainable modes like walking, biking, transit, and carpooling. Ms. Groll described how property owners trigger PTDM (by increasing parking on their property) and details regarding enforcement (including fines/penalties), to influence travel choices. Ms. Groll shared data representing a decrease from 40% to 35% over the past 18 years, with the caveat that the decrease cannot be solely attributed to the PTDM ordinance, but also accounts for the addition of sustainable mobility infrastructure, reduced parking, and encouragement campaigns.

Jeff Roberts continued the presentation with the topic of Zoning by reminding everyone that zoning regulates land use and development standards for those uses. Mr. Roberts shared the zoning map, noting Article 6 of the Zoning Ordinance, which regulates parking spaces, bicycle parking and loading bays, with today’s presentation focusing primarily on car parking. Mr. Roberts went on to explain parking as a type of land use, specifically the distinction in zoning between parking where cars can come and go and use that serves as storage. Mr. Roberts stated that parking as a land use can be either accessory parking (as part of another use, such as residential building or a commercial building), or a principal use, (as a separate land use unto itself not attached to anything else). If parking is accessory, then it is allowed wherever the principal use is allowed, but such parking must be located within a certain distance of that principal use, and it can only service users of that principal use.

Mr. Roberts shared slides showing the City’s base accessory parking requirements and recommended maximum parking ratios, noting that these requirements can be modified by special permit which has been common and typical for different types of proposals. Mr. Roberts concluded by stating that over the past 20 years the City Council has lowered parking ratios in specific areas to provide additional relief, and increased requirements for bicycle parking and allowing for car sharing, and other kinds of flexibility.

Joe Barr (Dir. of Traffic, Parking + Transportation) provided an overview of commercial parking, distinguishing the Cambridge Commercial Parking Freeze (implemented as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Clean Air Act) and Commercial Parking Space(s), which are defined as “a parking space available for use by the public at any time for a fee”. Mr. Barr stated that since the late ‘90’s, the City has been involved in a process to modify or replace the Parking Freeze, providing greater flexibility. Mr. Barr explained that though increased flexibility with commercial parking, pricing can be used as an incentive to discourage overuse. He also stated the need for careful consideration regarding what the right parking policies are, and that should the City retain its authority in the process for granting commercial parking permits, it could leverage policy to address issues locating commercial parking, equity, and other issues. Mr. Barr discussed the Resident Parking Program, including requirements for eligibility, fees, and potential changes to these requirements. He noted that for staff, discussion of changing parking requirements for commercial land uses is closely linked with the resident permit program, stating the potential risks and public perception of increasing pressure on on-street parking. Mr. Barr discussed other needed considerations for changing zoning requirements, including the Affordable Housing Overlay, repurposing of green spaces, and potential impacts of an increased permit fee. Mr. Barr concluded by briefly discussing curb cuts, explaining the existing the process, and noting the lack of clarity/process for removing or retiring curb cuts when needed.

Jeff Roberts spoke next regarding parking regulations, both within Cambridge, and generally in the planning world. He talked about limiting parking supply through maximum parking ratio, to help reduce traffic to benefit neighborhoods and serve the city's other environmental goals, particularly in the case of non-residential uses. He stated that Cambridge is affected by regional development patterns, which create demand for parking despite limited supply. He said that removing the minimum parking requirements has been implemented in Kendall and Central Squares, with the motivation that property owners, and the market in general, can regulate how much or how little parking is needed for land use, rather than the city regulating. Mr. Roberts discussed several potential concepts and talked about their effectiveness and potential downsides, including practices in other communities, saying that for these supply side strategies to work, it also requires the demand side approaches. Mr. Roberts restated the importance of transportation demand management and concluded his presentation by talking briefly about car ownership being a very personal and sometimes emotional issue requiring community engagement and sensitivity to the real needs of all community members. Mr. Roberts ended with a slide of potential zoning changes and complimentary non-zoning tools around PTDM and different ways of managing commercial parking or on-street parking.

Stephanie Groll wrapped CDD’s presentation by stressing the importance of involving the community in consideration of any parking regulation changes, balancing mobility needs, policy trade-offs and scenario preferences. Ms. Groll went on to detail a process evaluate the city, how the city regulates parking (from the perspective of how well they fulfill the city's planning policies related to traffic congestion), greenhouse gas emissions, climate resilience, housing, economic development, and social equity. She stated the expected timeline for this to begin in Fall 2021 and continuing into 2022, with the goal to bring recommendations as a result of this community engagement process to the council later next year.

Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler thanked CDD staff for the presentation and opened the floor for Public Comment.

Jeanne Oster, Guitar Stop, feels that the current studies do not factor in the economic impact on the small businesses from Arlington to Harvard Square and stated that removing public parking meters would put a lot of our businesses out of business.

Bill McAvinney, 12 Douglas Street, feels the City generally accepts that providing a heavily subsidized parking space to car owners is a human right, and that the cost of transit has increased significantly.

Carolyn Fuller, Central Square, supports removing the parking minimums from zoning laws, stating that limited parking encourages people to get rid of their cars.

Suzanne Blier spoke about a group that she has been working with and having parking as part of their broader agenda. She gave a variety of ideas/suggestions, underscoring community engagement and neighborhood groups.

Gary Mello, Franklin Street, stated the annual renewal program for residential stickers is unnecessary and feels the City should investigate the cars it can control from coming into the City, such as its own employees.

Jonathan Behrens, 115 Hampshire Street, supports ending parking minimums, imposing parking maximums where applicable, increasing permit costs for vehicle owners.

Heather Hoffman, 13 Hurley Street, expressed skepticism regarding the validity of the parking study and hopes that the decisions that we make are based on real facts, and not on the wishes and dreams of how we want people to act instead of how they actually act.

Allan Sadun, 24 Union Street, spoke about the discrepancy in strategy of reducing parking supply while accommodating demand. He stated the need to expand metered parking spaces is to make it so the people who are working in Cambridge can live and work in Cambridge.

Annette Osgood stated that it is unrealistic to think that reducing parking will reduce cars and that this action will have dire consequences on small businesses.

END OF PUBLIC COMMENT (chair opted not to vote to close Public Comment)

Councillor Zondervan stated the importance of reclaiming words, explaining that it doesn’t make sense to call storing a car “parking”. He said that car storage is one of the worst land uses cities employ and hopes to achieve zero car storage and usage through policy regime. He highlighted the need for expanded alternatives that are accessible, convenient, and affordable. Councillor Zondervan’s asked what it would take for us to get to a zero requirement, particularly for residential parking?

Jeff Roberts responded by stating that the minimum and maximum parking requirements can be reduced/amended, however reducing these maximums to zero would result in sites with accessory parking becoming nonconforming to zoning (which might raise a variety of issues). The City strategy has been trying to bring the minimum parking ratios down, and in some cases, for non-residential uses, all the way to zero, and then to have maximum parking ratios that limit the total amount of parking that can be created from new development. Mr. Roberts explained the flexibility in saying the existing parking isn’t required (and might therefore be used for another purpose), vs saying it isn’t allowed (which could create a different set of issues).

Councillor Zondervan asked if it would be possible to craft the zoning language to state that the zero maximum parking requirement only applies to new construction or is allowable by special permit (through zoning)?

Jeff Roberts replied saying that zoning generally affects new uses or changes to land. He said that when talking about base zoning, everything has to be uniform throughout a district, however with areas such as redevelopment areas, where we have overlay zoning, and other zoning tools, we are able to craft zoning to apply just to new, or specific kinds of development.

Iram Farooq added that philosophically in terms of eliminating or taking parking minimums down to zero, for nonresidential development, while this is an idea that we can all get behind, there is a need for a more robust transit system and increased mobility by other sustainable mechanisms to be able to get people back and forth in a fast and efficient manner.

Vice Mayor Mallon asked whether the City is planning to change the maximums Citywide, as was done in Kendall and Central Squares, and if this will be part of the study?

Stephani Groll stated that this is exactly the type of thing the City will be looking at.

Vice Mayor Mallon said that the presentation showed parking trends and single occupancy vehicle trip trends from 2016, and asked if studies will be done for the 2016-2021 period?

Stephanie Groll said that the City will be looking at all the data available including the American Community Survey, which encompasses this period, the PTDM, and special permit monitoring data, which was paused during the uncommon travel period, but will begin monitoring in Spring 2022.

Vice Mayor Mallon asked if the City is using an outside firm to conduct the study and community outreach?

Stephanie Groll replied that this is not a budgeted item and has been added to staff work plans (being done internally).

Vice Mayor Mallon asked Joe Barr in relation to the Commercial Parking Freeze Ordinance, to state some examples of what that might look like for Cambridge, for example what Somerville has for small businesses having some type of parking permit for employees?

Joe Barr responded that generally, as parking is removed for bike lanes, and bus lanes and other sustainable transportation in Cambridge, there are not often off-street options and creating those options often would require commercial parking (which would have its own land use consequences). Mr. Barr said that it's about creating a more flexible system for off-street parking and the additional flexibility mentioned earlier would enable those kinds of things to occur.

Vice Mayor Mallon asked if the presentation indicated that there is no tandem residential parking allowed in the City zoning.

Jeff Roberts responded that the current zoning requires that parking spaces must be independently accessible, so if you were to have a parking space that somebody could potentially not be able to exit from if somebody else was parked behind them, that requires a special permit.

Vice Mayor Mallon said that tandem parking did come up at a recent BZA meeting and was hotly contested/discussed. She said it seemed to be a very onerous part of our zoning, that we would not allow tandem parking residentially, and that homeowners who seek to reconfigure their lots must go for a special permit, or before the BZA and she hopes that the City can investigate the burden of cost to residents in time and angst, only to not be approved.

Suzanne Rasmussen (Dir. of Environment + Transportation) responded regarding trend lines, saying that all bets are off as to what the trend lines will be, referencing the McKinsey report indicating the potential of a 20% drop in in-office, inner city occupation, potentially a 15-to-50% drop in commuter rail usage, while hearing simultaneously in Kendall Square of Facebook and Google and Apple and those companies are stepping up hugely. Ms. Rasmussen said the city is actively trying to understand how this is unfolding but she does not think we know how the next several years are going to look in terms of what trip generation per square foot will be, particularly in commercial development.

Councillor Carlone said that there have been many studies on cities and change in economics, and always the healthy cities have bounced back, so he expects within a few years Cambridge will as well. Councillor Carlone asked how many City permit parking spaces does the City have in total?

Joe Barr responded that there has not been a full inventory of the curb frontage that is designated for resident parking, and stated in any case, it would be an estimate, because unlike metered parking spaces, permitted spaces are not boxed out in a specific number. He continued that in his estimation (in linear footage) there is more curb frontage than parking permits, however it is not evenly distributed around the city.

Councillor Carlone asked if FAR determines the commercial parking limits?

Jeff Roberts responded that that is one of the important limitations in zoning, above-grade structured parking, is subject to all the same regulations as a building, including FAR, height and setbacks, so when choosing between building space that can be used for housing, or office, etc., the parking that goes along with that counts as part of the building. Mr. Roberts stated that in addition to the previously described maximum parking limits, this can discourage the overbuilding of parking, and it does encourage parking to be built below grade.

Councillor Carlone asked if this also applies to commercial parking?

Jeff Roberts responded that it does, for accessory parking for commercial uses.

Councillor Carlone said he appreciated the presentation and thought it was quite in-depth. He said he feels it is well-needed, and he agrees with the Vice Mayor, and that parking should be lowered.

Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler asked if there has been a study done in Cambridge on reducing the impact the parking minimums on street parking, (does it result in more on-street parking/what is the ratio) or if it’s more of an anecdotal thought, and whether this data would be part of the upcoming study?

Jeff Roberts responded that development proposals with proposed reductions in parking, are required to provide some analysis showing what the what the effects might be, and in many cases, that analysis looks at nearby residential developments to determine the demand and parking within their parking garage, to try to understand what those ratios might be. Mr. Roberts stated several factors that complicate this analysis (including overlapping users of garage and on-street parking and price of parking), saying that anecdotally, reduced residential parking does affect the number of cars owned by residents of a building, however this is not easy to conclude, given the number of confounding factors.

Iram Farooq said that this is not a part of the proposed study as it would be difficult to measure and monitor in real time what the impacts of certain prices or certain changes in numbers of parking on site would have, considering differences in different parts of the city, which parts of the city have more on-street parking versus other parts where there isn't. She said that this complicated analysis would exceed in-house staff capacity and therefore is not part of the proposed analysis.

Joe Barr added that the best way to look at this would be to identify a reasonably-sized, new residential development that didn't have parking, and conduct a case study on what happens on the adjacent streets before and after, adding that people do obtain resident permits, even if they have off-street parking.

Susanne Rasmussen added that among the challenges of understanding auto ownership in the City is the inability to get proper data out of the Registry of Motor Vehicles, especially in the context of understanding greenhouse gas emissions and how they change over time.

Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler asked, related to resident parking fees, what is being considered beyond low-income exemptions, and the possibility of progressive fees and structuring these similarly to car registration fees which are tied to the year of purchase of the car and depreciation.

Joe Barr responded that this is not something the City has contemplated before and questioned if that would relate to a person’s income but said that this is worth consideration and discussion.

Councillor Sobrinho Wheeler asked if the City has thought about a residential permit fee by zone, or changes to the residential parking fee for persons who have off-street parking?

Joe Barr responded that the City has not considered this approach, but said it is worth discussing, considering impacts and enforcement. He said in terms of changing qualifications for permits, there is a constitutional issue around equal protection, potentially creating a danger that someone could challenge the entire program, by potentially discriminating against people based on where they live.

Councillor Zondervan said regarding the discussion about zero parking maximums and the net zero emissions efforts, while going from where we are to zero parking maximums might be hard to imagine, we can put together a plan that gradually gets us there by year 2040, or whatever we think is reasonable. He added that conversely, he agrees with the comment that once you get just a little bit removed from public transit stations, it's very difficult for people to get around the city without a car, so designing alternatives needs to focus on ease of use (i.e., free shuttle services). He also expressed frustration with the lack of a clear plan to reasonably increase parking permit fees, without overburdening low-income residents. He said this should be done progressively so that people who can afford to pay more for parking permits and those fees can be used for alternative transit solutions and improvements.

Vice Mayor Mallon spoke about the East Cambridge Business Association advocating free hop on/off shuttles from Lechmere to Inman Squares as one opportunity be more creative around using shuttles both to bolster small businesses as they're struggling, and to remove cars by providing a more sustainable way to get from one place to another in the city. Vice Mayor Mallon expressed support for the study and gathering community feedback. She also stated that she supports a graduated parking permit program, specifically in households with many cars, but thinks that more is required to move people to more sustainable modes of transportation and in increasing fees we should think about how the city support sustainable modes of transportation (such as electric bicycles), through low-interest loans through the municipal banking program.

Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler concluded with the reminder that eliminating parking minimums doesn't mean no new parking in the city, but it reduces burdens for small businesses and residential buildings to meet the city's requirements for parking. He said parking maximums do require a little more study to figure it out, based on the area based and proximity to transit. He added that less parking may mean additional on-street parking, but new parking incentivizes more cars in the city, which means more traffic (affecting all modes of transit) that all our residents will have to put up with. He also said he is looking forward to working with other Councillors on a policy order or zoning amendment on eliminating commercial and residential parking minimums soon and looking forward to the study from staff and the city including community input.

Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler moved to adjourn at 11:58am.
Yea: Sobrinho Wheeler, Zondervan, Mallon,
Absent: Nolan, Toomey

A communication was received from Parking and Transportation Demand Management Officer, Stephanie Groll, transmitting a presentation regarding car storage policies.

AWAITING REPORT LIST
16-111. Report on the potential of building below market rental housing on City-owned parking lots along Bishop Allen Drive. On a communication from Councillor McGovern requesting that this matter be forwarded to the 2018-2019 Legislative Session.
Vice Mayor McGovern, Mayor Simmons (O-4) from 12/12/2016

18-60. Report on a small business parking pilot that would allow temporary on-street employee parking during typical daytime operating hours.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Simmons (Calendar Item #1) from 5/14/2018

18-73. Report on establishing and implementing a dynamic new initiative that will seek to place Port residents (ages 18 and over) on paths to jobs with family-sustaining wages.
Councillor Simmons (O-6) from 6/25/2018

18-119. Report on evaluating the existing capacity of fire stations in the Kendall Square area and whether a new fire station is needed, and if so, determining the feasibility of locating a plot of land for this use.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toomey (O-2) from 11/5/2018

19-3. Report on establishing a Central Square Improvement Fund and allocate no less than 25% of funds generated to the arts.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern (O-6) from 1/7/2019

19-49. Report on recommending restrictions on signage specific to retail establishments that sell e-cigarettes and other vaping devices.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toomey (O-15) from 4/8/2019

19-62. Report on drafting a formal Anti-bias /Cultural Competency Strategic Plan for eventual adoption and implementation.
Councillor Simmons (O-2) from 5/20/2019

19-66. Report on whether it is possible to reduce or eliminate Building Permit Fees for 100% affordable housing development projects, through an exemption or other means and investigate what types of real estate tax abatements are possible for 100% affordable housing moving forward.
Vice Mayor Devereux, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern (O-3) from 6/3/2019

19-100. Report on the feasibility of implementing an additional regulatory requirement for listing a registration/license number for Short-Term Rentals.
Councillor Kelley, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Simmons (O-19) from 7/30/2019

19-130. Report on requesting to allocate more funds in the FY21 budget for the small business improvement grants and to confer with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office on whether other cities in Massachusetts have been facing similar issues with ADA compliance and what can be done to protect the small businesses.
Councillor Toomey (O-14) from 10/7/2019

19-145. Report on reviewing all the City’s policies and procedures related to the procurement, installation and disposal of artificial turf.
Vice Mayor Devereux, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Zondervan (O-7) from 10/21/2019

19-146. Report on reviewing the existing internal mechanisms for City staffers in all departments to report grievances, to determine if this system is functioning as it should or whether changes should be considered.
Councillor Simmons (O-3) from 10/28/2019

19-147. Report on installing hearing loop technology inside the Sullivan Chamber as part of the upcoming renovations to City Hall, and in other critical City meeting venues wherever possible and other accessibility improvements.
Councillor Zondervan (O-4) from 10/28/2019

20-6. Report on the acquisition and implementation of interpretation services for City Council meetings and other public City meetings.
Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern (O-8) from 1/27/2020

20-27. Report on the advantages and disadvantages of continuing with Civil Service, and the process by which Cambridge could exit Civil Service.
Councillor Nolan (O-5) from 6/22/2020

20-30. Report on establishing a plan designed to provide a thorough, system-wide review of the entire municipal government to identify and remove any vestiges of systemic racism and/or racial bias in any and all City departments, to establish clear, transparent metrics that will help further this critical endeavor.
Councillor Simmons, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Toomey (O-3) from 6/29/2020

20-31. Report on determining how to best protect and preserve our commercial spaces that support our small business operators and maintain continuity in our commercial districts.
Councillor Toomey, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui (O-5) from 6/29/2020

20-36. Report on generating a report detailing the Sole Assessment Process, the Civil Service HRD process, the reason for choosing the Sole Assessment Process over the Civil Service HRD process, and the projected costs associated with both processes.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler (O-5) from 7/27/2020

20-60. Report on analyzing eviction data from 2018 through 2021 and come back with a plan on how to use this data to inform our next action steps.
Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler (O-8) from 11/2/2020

20-61. Report on an update on City-Owned Vacant Properties Inventory.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Toomey (O-2) from 11/16/2020

20-65. Report on exploring the feasibility of hiring a consultant to perform an Equity Audit on the Cambridge Arts Council.
(O-1) from 11/23/2020

20-69. Report on formulating an RFP for a public arts project that will acknowledge the unfinished work of the 19th Amendment, the importance of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and how the two pieces of legislation ultimately complemented one another in helping to shape a more perfect union.
Councillor Simmons, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan (Calendar Item #2) from 11/30/2020

20-72. Report on the condition of 105 Windsor Street and cost estimates of any repairs needed and provide recommendations on how to develop any other underused properties based on an inclusive public process centered in the Port neighborhood.
Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons (Calendar Item #1) from 12/14/2020

21-6. Report on obtaining written documentation from the Cambridge Housing Authority, Homeowners Rehab, Inc., Just a Start, and the Community Development Department updating the City Council on the locations, unit sizes, number of units, overall costs, populations served, and expected dates of completion for each of the projects they reported on during the Housing Committee hearing held on Jan 12, 2021.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondervan (O-3) from 2/3/2021

21-8. Report on removing hostile architecture whenever public spaces are designed or redesigned and to create design guidelines that ensure our public spaces are truly welcoming to the entire community and determine how existing bench fixtures can be addressed to support all residents who use them.
Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui (Calendar Item #3) from 2/8/2021

21-9. Report on providing an overview of various programs and services that are designed to assist the City’s chronically unhoused population and those in danger of becoming unhoused, along with the metrics by which the City determines the effectiveness of these programs.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toomey, Vice Mayor Mallon (O-1) from 2/22/2021

21-10. Report on whether or not the City can require written notice be sent to all abutters, both property owners as well as tenants, regarding the scheduling of a hearing regarding the extension of a building permit request to the Planning Board.
(O-5) from 2/22/2021

21-14. Report on presenting options to the Council to ensure that the staff at Albany Street are properly compensated for their work, and that guests are treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.
Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler (Calendar Item #3) from 3/8/2021

21-17. Report on initiating a process to begin chronicling the rich and vibrant history of people of color in Cambridge, similar to other City-commissioned books such as “We Are the Port: Stories of Place, Perseverance, and Pride in the Port/Area 4 Cambridge, Massachusetts 1845-2005” and “All in the Same Boat” and “Crossroads: Stories of Central Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1912-2000”.
Councillor Simmons (O-2) from 3/15/2021

21-19. Report on providing an update on progress made towards including information from the Cambridge Minority Business Enterprise Program in the Open Data Portal.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons (O-4) from 3/22/2021

21-22. Report on making sure all information on the City's list of neighborhood organizations are updated and that a specific staffer be tasked with ensuring that the information is updated on an annual basis.
Councillor Simmons (O-5) from 4/5/2021

21-29. Report on updating the Parental Leave Policy for employees.
Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons (O-7) from 4/26/2021

21-30. Report on increasing the affordable homeownership stock over the next 10 years by financing the construction of affordable homeownership units through a bond issue of no less than $500 million.
Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Simmons (Calendar Item #1) from 5/3/2021

21-32. Report on exploring and implement strategies to enhance safety at the intersection of Memorial Drive and DeWolfe Street.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan (O-2) from 5/3/2021

21-33. Report on including an EV requirement in the review of development projects, including that a minimum of 25% of all parking spaces shall be EVSE-Installed, meaning a parking space equipped with functioning Level 2 Chargers, or the equivalent thereof must be provided, and that all parking spaces be EV-ready, meaning raceway to every parking space, adequate space in the electrical panel, and space for additional transformer capacity; the City approved EV Requirement Equivalent Calculator must be used if chargers other than Level 2 Chargers are installed.
Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone (O-3) from 5/3/2021

21-35. Report on providing options to update the HomeBridge and Affordable Home Ownership Programs to better align with the City’s values, and promote racial equity and socioeconomic justice.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui (O-6) from 5/3/2021

21-36. Report on developing a holistic plan for managing the traffic and congestion in the Alewife area.
Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor Mallon (O-2) from 5/17/2021

21-37. Report on consulting with relevant Department heads and the non-profit community on "Digital Equity" and provide an implementation plan, schedule, and request for appropriation.
Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Zondervan (O-4) from 5/17/2021

21-38. Report on consulting with relevant Department heads on other broadband benefits programs offered by the Federal government, and the City’s plans to leverage these funds in pursuit of Digital Equity.
Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Zondervan (O-5) from 5/17/2021

21-40. Report on implementing a heavy truck traffic ban on Roberts Road from Kirkland Street to Cambridge Street.
Councillor Toomey, Mayor Siddiqui (O-8) from 5/17/2021

21-42. Report on reviewing Cambridge’s corporate contracts and purchases to identify any vendors or manufacturers whose products are used to perpetuate violations of International Human Rights Laws and Cambridge’s policy on discrimination.
Councillor Nolan, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons (Calendar Item #2) from 5/25/2021

21-43. Report on referring the Cambridge HEART proposal for funding consideration and to engage in a public community process to discuss this proposal and its implementation.
Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Zondervan (Calendar Item #1) from 6/7/2021

21-45. Report on taking all necessary steps to waive the dog license fee for all senior citizens and examine options for reducing the fees for low-income residents.
Councillor McGovern (Calendar Item #1) from 6/14/2021

21-46. Report on the feasibility of purchasing properties for sale in the Alewife area to address City goals.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone (O-1) from 6/14/2021

21-47. Report on exploring the feasibility of expanding services at the senior centers, especially by adding clinical staff.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons (O-3) from 6/14/2021

21-48. Report on determining if the City has the discretion to waive the Commonwealth's housing sanitary code requirements and the circumstances in which the City could administer this waiver.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui (O-4) from 6/14/2021

21-49. Report on making immediate improvements at the intersection of Cardinal Medeiros Avenue, Binney and Bristol Streets and to all intersections in the city that are similarly malfunctioning, and to implement longer term changes.
Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan (O-8) from 6/14/2021

21-50. Report on providing an update on the cost of each license and permit required by businesses, which business license and permit fees are set under state law, which are set by ordinances, and which are determined administratively, as well as which licenses and permits the City has the discretion to waive entirely.
Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan (O-9) from 6/14/2021

21-51. Report on examining and implementing a flexible, permanent remote work policy for City employees who can perform their tasks remotely.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan (O-5) from 6/28/2021

21-52. Report on examining stipend models for the City's multi-member bodies.
Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan (O-8) from 6/28/2021

21-53. Report on examining safety improvements at the intersection of Ware and Harvard Streets.
Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler (O-9) from 6/28/2021

21-54. Report on exploring the feasibility of providing Equity Roadmap with regular funding for Friday Night Hype.
Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Toomey (O-1) from 8/2/2021

21-58. Report on addressing increased gun activity.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon (O-4) from 8/2/2021

21-55. Report on assessing what is driving this new activity, and to deploy the necessary resources to tamp down on the gun violence being seen in the above-referenced areas.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon (O-4) from 8/2/2021

21-57. Report on how the city is working to get City staff to 100% vaccinated and decrease the likelihood that COVID-19 spreads via City staff and in City Buildings.
Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon (O-10) from 8/2/2021

21-59. Report on creating a new section on the City Council’s webpage devoted to clearly outlining the various steps of the dedication request process, to post the criteria by which these requests are determined by the Dedication Committee.
Councillor Simmons (O-2) from 9/13/2021

21-60. Report on reviewing the residential parking permit program to determine whether the criteria for this program can be modified to limit the issuance of residential permits to vehicles that are primarily utilized for personal, non-commercial use.
Councillor Simmons (O-3) from 9/13/2021

21-61. Report on the City’s rodent and pest control efforts since February 2020, to outline what metrics are being used to determine the effectiveness of these efforts, and to issue recommendations as to whether increasing the budget for these efforts, as well as creating new incentives and penalties to ensure community compliance with regulations around rodent control, would lead to a greater level of success in resolving this issue.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan (O-4) from 9/13/2021

21-62. Report on the feasibility of installing lights at all Cambridge dog parks.
Councillor McGovern (O-4) from 9/13/2021

21-63. Report on using only locally sourced produce, farmers, and resident gardeners to study the feasibility of spending Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Funds to address food insecurity by installing raised garden beds throughout Cambridge and providing free, fresh, locally-grown food for residents in need.
Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone (O-9) from 9/13/2021

Effective Date	Housing Contribution Rate
Sept 28, 2015	$12.00 per square foot.
Sept 28, 2016 (Annual Adjustment)	$13.00 per square foot.
Nov 16, 2016 (CPI Adjustment)	$13.50 per square foot.
Sept 28, 2017 (Annual Adjustment)	$14.50 per square foot.
Oct 18, 2017 (CPI Adjustment)	$14.95 per square foot.
Sept 28, 2018 (Annual Adjustment)	$15.95 per square foot.
Nov 18, 2019 (CPI Adjustment)	$17.10 per square foot.
January 28, 2020 (City Council Amendment)	$20.10 per square foot.
XX XX, 2021 (City Council Amendment)	$33.34 per square foot.