Cambridge City Council meeting - Dec 17, 2012 - AGENDA

CITY MANAGER’S AGENDA
1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following person as a Constable With Power for a three year term, effective the first day of January, 2013: Patricia Breen, Cambridge, MA

2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-67, regarding a report on implementing a ban on trucks transporting hazardous materials through the City.
Referred to Transportation, Traffic and Parking Committee - Kelley

Dec 17, 2012
To the Honorable, the City Council:

In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-67, regarding a report on implementing a ban on trucks transporting hazardous materials through the City, Traffic, Parking & Transportation Director Susan Clippinger reports the following:

Municipalities desiring to restrict trucks from certain streets or during certain times of day must make that request to MassDOT. MassDOT requires specific back up material and information as part of a request including traffic and truck counts, adjacent land use analysis, etc. and an alternative routing. Any alternative routing that impacts another municipality must be jointly requested by both municipalities.

The City does have some truck restrictions all of which were approved by MassDOT (or its predecessor Mass Highway Dept) and we have state permits for each of them. Trucks are also restricted from using Memorial Drive and some DCR roadways which are regulations under DCR's jurisdiction. All the truck restricted streets are listed and shown on a map on our website. The city also has a signed truck route that goes from Western Ave at Memorial Drive to Binney and Land Blvd. This route is also shown on the truck restriction map on our website.

Hazardous cargo trucks in Cambridge are predominately carrying home heating fuel and gas for service stations. They are traveling from the fuel depots in Everett, Revere and Chelsea to destinations in Cambridge, in the adjacent communities inside Rt. 128 or to the Mass Pike to access more distant locations. They travel through Cambridge via the designated truck route. They are banned from using the MassPike east of the Cambridge exit 18 to Boston and the airport as the road travel in a tunnel section under the Prudential Center. They are banned in all the tunnel roadway sections - Sumner, Callahan or Ted Williams tunnels, and the downtown section of I-93 (Big Dig). All these underground sections of tunnel are banned by the Boston Fire Department due to safety issues related to a spill and/or fire in the tunnels and the danger associated with responding to such an incident.

Hazardous cargo trucks in Boston travel through downtown along the surface artery above the "Big Dig" as they are restricted from the below grade roadway. The City of Boston has restricted then during the day but allowed them to use the route at night. In response to neighborhood pressure they sought to restrict then at all times. The City of Cambridge strongly opposed this as it would leave the Cambridge route as the only option other than going out to Rt. 128 and around. MassDOT reviewed the extensive materials that the City of Boston had collected, held a number of hearings and determined that a night time ban on through hazardous trucks in downtown Boston would adversely impact a large number of municipalities in the region and determined that Boston would not be permitted to restrict through hazardous trucks from traveling through downtown Boston at night.

Cambridge is not adversely impacted by this decision as it preserved the pre-existing condition. The process has shown there are substantial impediments associated with trying to restrict hazardous cargo routings and travel times beyond what is already in place. If Cambridge tried to institute a ban on hazardous cargo trips through the City it would be strongly opposed by adjacent municipalities including the City of Boston and MassDOT.

Very truly yours, Robert W. Healy, City Manager

3. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-137, regarding a report on wait times during past elections such as the Nov 6th Presidential Election.
Referred back to City Manager - Decker

Dec 17, 2012
To the Honorable, the City Council:

Please find attached a response to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-137, regarding a report on wait times during past elections such as the Nov 6th Presidential Election, received from Executive Director of the Election Commission Tanya Ford.

Voters waiting in line can depend on a number of factors. The wait is a result of, but not limited to, the number of people being processed, the number of election workers available and the amount of time it takes each individual voter to cast their vote. Wait time is also affected by the design of the voting process, amount of available equipment and size of the space available.

Any time there is an increased voter interest, such as in the Presidential Election of Nov 6, 2012, longer lines will occur. During the election, waiting lines primarily occurred during a two hour window. Between the hours of 7am and 9am the approximate voter turnout was 50% of the total voters on Election Day. At most of our precincts, long lines had formed well before the polls even opened, creating a back-log early which persisted for several hours. This temporary surge in demand could not be quickly handled. In an effort to speed up service, some modifications might be made but with the limitation of room size especially, I believe only a minuscule reduction in wait time could be achieved.

A critical space and time saver would be the elimination of the check-out requirement. Massachusetts is the only state in the union which requires check-out. One suggestion is the use of additional equipment (booths, tables, scanners) and poll workers if the polling precinct space permits. The goal is to have enough equipment and workers to possibly assist in reducing wait times but not so many as to be cost inefficient. With long lines only occurring during part of the day once every four years, investing in extra equipment may not be efficient. When determining whether to purchase more scanners and ballot boxes we must consider the cost, life expectancy, state law requirements, and proposals which may have been submitted to the Secretary of State to replace the current election equipment in the near future. The viability of more equipment can be investigated and assessed. However, is there a less costly way?

Is it possible to achieve a more constant voter arrival rate? With Presidential elections especially comes variable demand and variable service times. You cannot necessarily anticipate how much voter demand there will be and exactly what will occur with each voter within the process. Each voter is unique and requires a different amount of service time. By using a first-come, first-served process, a voter waiting behind another voter who cannot be found on the precinct voting list and insists he/she is registered, or requests to cast a provisional ballot, waits longer than a voter waiting behind a voter whose name is found immediately and moves quickly through the voting process. Although processing was sequential, the wait times varied because of providing service to meet the preceding voters' needs.

When there are new voters or voters who vote infrequently, there will be always be voters going to the wrong precincts. We also contend with voters who are registered in other municipalities and who may not understand that they cannot vote just anywhere. In these and other instances, the precinct Warden must adhere to the requirements of the law which includes possible identification checks, determinations that the voter is or is not registered, etc. and each circumstance must be addressed in different ways. Voters are served in a first-come first-served fashion and while this may not be the best option for voters requiring short wait times, it seems to be the fairest. The possibility of using an "express line", offering voters who would prefer not to wait for an available booth a privacy sleeve and a ballot, may also be something to be investigated. However, this might compromise the secrecy of the ballot and, in any event, I believe would only achieve a small reduction in wait-time. In addition, there is no guarantee that voters in the "express line" would not also have problems that slow down that line.

The elderly and disabled could also be offered the opportunity to vote ahead of others. There is no doubt, however, that other voters, who have waited a long time and who may have their own time constraints, would object to the preference. And even if such people are moved to the head of the line they may still require additional service time to resolve issues not known until they have checked-in. The process will still require check-in, check-out and scanning. Reviewing lengthy ballots and reading lengthy and/or complex ballot questions cannot be changed. In considering this strategy we also must be careful not to stigmatize any voter or jeopardize the integrity of the election process.

The voting process is completed in a series of steps: check-in, completing ballot, check-out and scanning ballot. At the precincts, workers are assigned to stations/tables. If an issue arises the voter will proceed to the Warden's table to have the issue addressed. In order to resolve some issues the Warden must contact the Election Commission Office and speak with an office staff member or the Director. Once in contact with a staff member the process of searching for information pertaining to that voter can take awhile also delaying the wait time. Here too, the number of people available to assist precinct officers is limited to the number of phone lines available, the number of computer stations linked to the Secretary of State's system, and the amount of office space at the Commission offices.

Wait time is determined by the number of voters who arrive at a certain time and the number of voters who can be serviced during that time. If the number of voters the election workers or office staff can serve during a period of time is less than the average number of voters arriving, the wait lines will grow and it will be difficult to catch up. Lines form when several voters appear at approximately the same time, as in this past election. The surge of voters temporarily overloads the voting process and a line develops. Assigning workers to notify voters in line of the estimated wait time will allow the voter to make an informed decision on whether to wait or return at another time, if possible. Posting an estimated wait time notification sign outside could serve as the notification tool at each precinct, but election workers would need to update it during peak times.

In order to determine estimated wait time one would have to supply the last voter in line a card with the current time written on it. When the voter arrives at the check-in table, an election worker would write the current time and the total wait time could be estimated. Once wait time is received from a precinct, the Warden could then appraise the Commissioners and City Manager of the situation and the city could possibly publicize the information on website. "Estimated Voting Wait Time Notification", or a modified version thereof, may be developed and used for notification of voters. Computer support is an important factor to insuring accuracy, security and consistency in this process. Could voice and/or data communications links between the voter, Election Commission, polling locations and election workers be possible? Factors in developing communication procedures may include: cost of support, type of network available city and state & capability, availability of authorized personnel, assignment of an election computer/communication support team necessary to facilitate and support the process. It also is necessary to make sure that adding this service doesn't cause more problems than it solves. If polling place staff are being used to monitor and report wait times at the polls, and election commission staff are being used to keep the wait times on the website updated, that could actually increase the wait times because those staff could be assisting voters instead.

On Election Day the Election Commission office is overwhelming busy. On this day three (3) to four (4) temporary staff members are hired to assist in the office and answer phones. Some calls are resolved quickly, others need further research. Increasing the number of temporary workers and telephone lines in the office leading up to and on Election Day can increase voter assistance, assist more election workers in resolving some issues in polling places and get more information to the Election Office Staff and Director to handle the more complicated voting issues and concerns. The voter wait time may be reduced since there will be more available phone lines, increasing the likelihood of being able to contact the office to get voter information.

Another thing that would drastically reduce the wait time would be for voters to be more prepared on Election Day. If voters take the time before the election to verify where they are registered, there will be fewer voters at the wrong place to slow down the lines. If voters read the ballot questions before they get to the polls, they will spend less time in the voting booth. While this information was available by calling the Election Commission, emailing the Election Commission or going to the Election Commission or the Secretary of State's website, perhaps more can be done to encourage voters to prepare themselves, such as a press release or an email alert.

Please find below a chart which includes approximate wait times and number of voting booths for a few precincts supplied by Commissioner Polyxane Cobb and as reported by the assigned election workers of each ward/precinct.

Ward/Precinct	Approx. # of Voting Booths	Longest Approx. Wait Time (Minutes)	Turnout*	# of Votes cast
9-1	8	30	83.6%	2077
9-2	9	30	78.0%	1932
9-3	10	60	77.0%	1599
10-1	9	40	77.5%	1963
10-3	8	60	74.9%	1554
11-1	8	45	67.7%	1329
11-2	12	45	79.7%	2102
11-3	10	15 to 20	78.8%	1495

*Voter turnout was determined by Lesley Waxman, Asst. Director

According to the chart, the wait times varied and were not solely based on turnout, as illustrated in Ward 9 Precinct 1 where the approximate wait time was thirty (30) minutes and they had a higher turnout than other wards/precincts, which had more booths, fewer votes cast and incurred longer wait times.

In the process of investigating and considering strategies to address the concerns of wait times at precincts I found that there have been discussions on possibly changing the voting system to alter the voting process performance. However, any changes to the voting process/system will then need to be evaluated on a state or federal level. The voting system is not determined on a local level. State election administrators do not permit voting systems which have not been certified for polling place voting to be used in polling places. Therefore developing additional voting systems to reduce the wait time would first need to be reviewed and certified by the state. Something more substantive may have to be decided on a legislative level. There has been recent proposed federal legislation which proposes to reduce wait time at the polls, require states to hold early voting, and ensure that all voters have easier opportunities to vote. This legislation would require that all states have the necessary resources to ensure that all precincts are prepared to accommodate anticipated voter turnout and that no one has to wait for more than one hour to vote. This legislation would require funding and absolute commitment by all involved for its success.

Proposed legislation is as follows:

H.R. 6591 - Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early Voting (SIMPLE) Voting Act
To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require States to establish a minimum period of 15 days for early voting prior to the date of an election for Federal office and to ensure that no individual will be required to wait for longer than one hour to cast a ballot at a polling place in an election for Federal office.

S. 3635 - Fair, Accurate, Secure & Timely (FAST) Voting Act
To provide incentives for States to invest in practices and technology that are designed to expedite voting at the polls and to simplify voter registration.

S. 3657 - Lines Interfere with National Elections (LINE) Act
To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to ensure that voters in elections for Federal office do not wait in long lines in order to vote. (Would require the Attorney General to set the minimum number of voting systems, poll workers and other election resources during federal elections)

Reducing voting wait times is an ongoing nationwide discussion including suggestions, probabilities and recently proposed legislation. Possible strategies and proposals will need to be assessed with regard to limitations. Limitations include physical environment (precinct/building location, accessibility, storage, security, internal facility), technical environment (network, hardware & software limitations), regulation (Local, State and Federal), and fiscal (budgetary).

The Election Commission will confer with the City Manager regarding suggested strategies to reduce voting wait times including but not limited to dissemination of information on Election Day. The Commission will also follow-up with the Secretary of State's Office to be appraised of possible legislation, new equipment, contingency plans, funding etc. pertaining to the reduction of wait time during elections such as the Presidential Election.

Very truly yours, Robert W. Healy, City Manager

4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-99, regarding a report on statistical information regarding enforcement citations issued for loud motorcycle mufflers and car radios and the City's plan to address these issues.
Referred to Public Safety Committee - Kelley

5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-131, regarding a report on possible advantages of the "preservation easement" process.

6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-134, regarding what policies exist to protect individuals awaiting the opening of the Cambridge Senior Center during extreme weather conditions.
Referred to Human Services Committee - Simmons

7. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of a grant from the Massachusetts Cultural Council for $16,350 to the Grant Fund Public Celebrations (Arts Council) Other Ordinary Maintenance account which will be used to provide mini-grants to artists, arts organizations and community groups in Cambridge.

8. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of a Traffic Enforcement Grant from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security in the amount of $16,000 to the Grant Fund Police Department Salary and Wages account which will be used to support high-visibility enforcement during the "Click It or Ticket" and "Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over" campaigns; the purpose of which is to promote safety and reduce impaired driving.

9. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an increase in the appropriation of the Center for Families Children's Trust Fund grant through the Department of Education in the amount of $5,000.00 to the Grant Fund Human Service Programs Other Ordinary Maintenance account which will be used by the Center for Families to support family programs targeting parents of children up to six years, which include a variety of family support and parent education programs and resources.

10. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of the Community Access Monitor Grant in the amount of $1,615.00 to the Grant Fund Human Service Programs Other Ordinary Maintenance account which was funded from registration fees to attend the Community Access Monitor training co-sponsored by the Commission for Persons with Disabilities and the Massachusetts Office on Disability and used for food costs at the training on Sept 11-12, 2012.

11. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-116, regarding a report on maintaining the present Central Square Farmer's Market permit rate.

Dec 17, 2012
To the Honorable, the City Council:

In response to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-116, regarding a report on maintaining the present Central Square Farmer's Market permit rate, Assistant City Manager for Community Development Brian Murphy and Traffic, Parking & Transportation Director Susan Clippinger report the following:

The Central Square Farmers Market is an asset to the community, serving the residents of the city since 1988, providing fresh, locally grown fruits and vegetables. The Market accepts SNAP (formerly food stamps) benefits and offers dollar for dollar match transactions for up to $10 to income eligible residents. In addition, the Cambridge Food for Free program, based at Cambridge Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc (CEOC), is a recipient of surplus fruits and vegetables that are not sold at the end of market days, which helps to reduce local emergency food pantry budgets over the market season and allows more dollars to be allocated during the winter months for residents in need.

Last winter the Department of Traffic, Parking and Transportation (TP&T) began to work on the fee rate structure for permits. As a result of this process, the Central Square Farmers Market use of Municipal Parking Lot #5 was reviewed. The City has been charging the market a $100.00 application fee for the use of 29 meters for the 27 Mondays over a period of 7 months of the market season. Normally when applicants are permitted to use metered parking spaces, the fee, in addition to the application fee, also includes a charge of $10/meter per day. TP&T understands that this fee would be unreasonable given the community value the market contributes to the City and its operating costs; however staff have calculated a loss of revenue of $2,270.70 for the 2012 market season. This loss will double to $4,541.70 in the 2013 market season now that the new Pay and Display meter system has been installed.

The Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department, in consultation with the Community Development Department and the Federation of Massachusetts Farmers Markets, and in recognition of the importance of the market to the Community, has set the fee for the 2013 market season at $400.00.

Very truly yours, Robert W. Healy, City Manager

12. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Policy Order O-2 of Dec 3, 2012, relative to the impact the recently passed medical marijuana referendum might have on Cambridge and provide any suggested zoning or local ordinance changes relevant to this new law.
Referred to Ordinance Committee, Planning Board, and Public Saftey Committee - Kelley

Dec 17, 2012

To the Honorable, the City Council:

The following information is submitted in response to Policy Order O-2 of Dec 3, 2012, relative to the impact the recently passed medical marijuana referendum might have on Cambridge and provide any suggested zoning or local ordinance changes relevant to this new law.

Background

An initiative petition titled "Law for the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana" (Petition #11-11) was approved by Massachusetts voters during the Nov 6, 2012 general election. The law will take effect Jan 1, 2013.

The new law defines a "medical marijuana treatment center," as a Massachusetts not-for-profit entity, registered under this new law, that acquires, cultivates, possesses, processes (including development of related products such as food, tinctures, aerosols, oils or ointments), transfers, transports, sells distributes, dispenses or administers marijuana, products containing marijuana, related supplies or educational materials to qualifying patients or their personal caregivers. The new law enables the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) to register up to 35 such centers within the first year of enactment, with a minimum of one and a maximum of five located within each county. DPH is required to promulgate regulations for the registration and administration of such centers within 120 days of enactment, i.e., by May 1, 2013.

Thus far, the production and distribution of marijuana for medical use has been legalized in 18 states and the District of Columbia. Laws and regulations vary state by state, but in some places, experience has shown that medical marijuana production and distribution facilities have resulted in negative land use impacts. In some more densely populated cities such as Los Angeles and Berkeley, CA, and Denver, CO, clusters of medical marijuana "dispensaries" have proliferated in commercial areas, where they have impacted surrounding uses by attracting criminal activity or causing a general public nuisance. Attempts to regulate such uses after they have already been established have often been unsuccessful.

Recommendations

The history of legalized medical marijuana in the United States provides lessons that could help mitigate potential negative impacts of its implementation in Massachusetts in general and Cambridge in particular. However, given that the system for regulating medical marijuana treatment centers at the state level is not yet clear, and the City has not had the opportunity to study and discuss the public health, safety, general welfare and land use implications of the new law, it would be beneficial to establish an interim restriction on the establishment of such uses until the City can develop a rational framework for regulating these uses under the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance and through any other local regulations as may be appropriate. The interim zoning amendment will allow the City's Public Health Department to review the state DPH's regulations once they are made available in the coming months. Also, this will provide time for City staff to take a closer look at recommended hygiene practices, communications strategies to area residents, and systems of accountability that should be put in place as the City weighs the options for the proposed medical marijuana treatment centers. A draft interim zoning amendment is attached for your consideration.

I recommend that the Public Safety Committee hold a meeting on the potential impacts on public health, safety and welfare the recently passed medical marijuana referendum might have on Cambridge. City staff will study and review potential impacts that may result from allowing medical marijuana treatment centers to be located in Cambridge, and will report on any such anticipated impacts at the Public Safety Committee meeting.

I further recommend that the attached proposed interim zoning amendment be referred to the Ordinance Committee, so that the proposed interim zoning amendment may be advertised prior to Jan 1 and hearings may be scheduled in accordance with Massachusetts Chapter 40A.

Very truly yours, Robert W. Healy, City Manager

Proposed Zoning Amendment
Create the following new section in Article 11.000 – Special Regulations:
11.700 INTERIM REGULATIONS FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA USES
11.701   Purpose.  This section is intended to provide restrictions that will allow the City adequate time to consider whether to allow facilities associated with the medical use of marijuana, to the extent that such facilities are permitted under state laws and regulations, and, if so, where and under what conditions. Given that a law permitting the medical use of marijuana in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts shall be in effect beginning January 1, 2013, and that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health has yet to promulgate the regulations by which facilities that produce or dispense medical marijuana shall be registered and administered, a restriction on the establishment of such facilities in Cambridge shall provide the opportunity to study their potential impacts on adjacent uses and on general public health, safety and welfare, and to develop zoning and other applicable regulations that appropriately address these considerations consistent with statewide regulations and permitting procedures.
11.702   Definition.  A  Medical Marijuana Treatment Center shall mean any medical marijuana treatment center, as defined under state law as a Massachusetts not-for-profit entity that acquires, cultivates, possesses, processes (including development of related products such as food, tinctures, aerosols, oils, or ointments), transfers, transports, sells, distributes, dispenses, or administers marijuana, products containing marijuana, related supplies, or educational materials to qualifying patients or their personal caregivers, which is properly licensed and registered by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health pursuant to all applicable state laws and regulations.
11.703   Exclusion of Other Marijuana Uses.  Any establishment that acquires, cultivates, possesses, processes (including development of related products such as food, tinctures, aerosols, oils, or ointments), transfers, transports, sells, distributes, dispenses, or administers marijuana, products containing marijuana, related supplies, or educational materials to qualifying patients or their personal caregivers shall not be permitted if such establishment has not been properly registered and licensed in accordance with applicable state and local laws and regulations, or is not operated as a not-for-profit entity, or otherwise fails to meet the definition of a Medical Marijuana Treatment Center.
11.704   Exclusion of Accessory Uses.  In no case shall the acquisition, cultivation, possession, processing, transference, transportation, sale, distribution, dispensing, or administration of marijuana, products containing or derived from marijuana, or related products be considered accessory to any use.
11.705   Interim Restriction.  Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers shall not be permitted in any zoning district in the City of Cambridge so long as this Section 11.700 is effective, as set forth in Section 11.706 below. Use variances shall be strictly prohibited.
11.706   Expiration.  This Section 11.700 shall be effective for a period of nine (9) months beginning January 1, 2013, or until such future time that the Cambridge City Council enacts superseding zoning regulations that set forth the allowed locations, dimensional, parking and other requirements applicable to medical marijuana uses.

ON THE TABLE
1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-09, regarding a report on the use of coal and on Cambridge becoming coal-free. [City Manager Agenda Number One of Mar 5, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Vice Mayor Simmons on Mar 5, 2012.]

2. Urge greater cooperation from the Cambridge Housing Authority to better serve the people of Cambridge. [Order Number Two of Apr 9, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Vice Mayor Simmons on Apr 9, 2012.]

3. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department and other relevant departments in order to present to the City Council a map of Cambridge that shows, by location and by date, all of the areas where construction is and will be taking place over the coming decade. [Order Number Four of Apr 9, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Toomey on Apr 9, 2012.]

4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item No. 12-28, regarding temporary ramps and obstructions in construction zones. [City Manager Agenda Number Eight of Apr 23, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Kelley on Apr 23, 2012.]

5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-35, which requests a report on whether there were any public safety officers that falsified their emergency medical training re-certification while employed by the City of Cambridge. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey on City Manager Agenda Number Two of May 21, 2012. Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Toomey on June 4, 2012.]

6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-63 regarding a report on safety issues at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Vassar Street. [City Manager Number Twenty-three of July 30, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Kelley on July 30, 2012.]

7. That the City Manager is requested to confer with relevant City staff and report back to the City Council on whether a tagging program could be implemented to notify owners of bicycles that have been removed from sign posts by the Department of Public Works and contact information for retrieval of said bicycle. [Order Number Fourteen of July 30, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Councillor vanBeuzekom on July 30, 2012. Councillor Toomey recorded in the negative on Tabling.]

8. That the Cambridge City Council go on record urging the members of the Massachusetts Committee on House Steering, Policy and Scheduling to pass MA House Bill 4165, "An Act Relative to Speed Limits." [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Decker on Order Number Eleven of Nov 19, 2012. Order Number Eleven of Nov 19, 2012 Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Toomey on Dec 3, 2012.]

UNFINISHED BUSINESS
9. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Oct 3, 2012 to discuss a zoning petition filed by Susan Yanow, et al to rezone from the existing Business A to Business A-1 the areas bounded by Windsor, Main Streets, Bishop Allen Drive, Columbia, Prospect and Norfolk Streets; rezone from the existing Bus. B and CRDD to a proposed new district Bus. B-3 in the area bounded by Green, Landsdowne, Magazine and Prospect Streets and Mass. Ave. define as a protected neighborhood zone the area zoned Res. C-1 and bounded by Portland, Main and Windsor Streets and a line 120 feet north of and parallel to Main Street; rezone the areas currently identified as Municipal Parking Lots along Bishop Allen Drive to a proposed new Municipal Parking District (MP).
To be Place on File on Jan 3, 2013 and allowed to expire

10. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Oct 3, 2012 to discuss the zoning petition filed by Patty Chen, et al. to amend the Zoning Ordinance in Section 20.300 Central Square Overlay District in Section 20.304.5 Use Limitations and Restrictions. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after Dec 17, 2012. Planning Board hearing held Nov 20, 2012. Petition expires Feb 12, 2013.
Ordained 8-0-1, Ordinance #1352

APPLICATIONS AND PETITIONS
1. An application was received from Puritan & Co requesting permission for three awnings and a blade sign at the premises numbered 1164-1166 Cambridge Street. Approval has been received from Inspectional Services, Department of Public Works, Community Development and abutters.

2. An application was received from GAP requesting permission for a blade sign at the premises numbered 15 Brattle Street. Approval has been received from Inspectional Services, Department of Public Works, Community Development, Historical Commission and abutters.

3. A zoning petition has been received from Massachusetts Institute of Technology to amend the Zoning Ordinance by adding a new Section 13.80 and amend the Zoning Map by adding a new PUD-5 District.
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board

COMMUNICATIONS
1. A communication was received from the Central Square Advisory Committee describing their vision for Central Square.

2. A communication was received from Ismail Laher transmitting deep gratitude for the City Council resolution.

3. A communication was received from Tom Stohlman, 19 Channing Street regarding his open meeting law complaint.

RESOLUTIONS
1. Retirement of Jayne Kosinski from the Department of Public Works.   Mayor Davis

2. Resolution on the death of Shannon Travers-Costa.   Councillor Toomey

3. Resolution on the death of Fernando P. Castanheira.   Councillor Toomey

4. Resolution on the death of Vincent P. "Buddy" Clark.   Councillor Maher

5. Congratulations to Taylor Woods-Gauthier on being named Executive Director of Emerge Massachusetts.   Vice Mayor Simmons

6. Congratulations to Kathleen McCartney on her new position as President of Smith College.   Councillor Decker

7. Encourage residents to participate in the 2013 Dr. Martin Luther King Day of Service on Jan 21, 2013.   Mayor Davis

8. Resolution on the death of Dick Easler.   Mayor Davis

9. Resolution on the death of Michael R. Grossi.   Councillor Maher

10. Resolution on the death of Margaret M. Carroll.   Councillor Maher

11. Resolution on the death of Harold F. "Harry, Sonny" Helmuth Jr.   Councillor Maher

12. Condolences to the families and residents of Newtown, Connecticut, on the recent tragedy in their community.   Mayor Davis

ORDERS
1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation and work to establish a reduced small business parking rate for local business owners at city garages and to report back to the City Council.   Councillor Toomey

2. That the City Manager is requested to offer the necessary assistance and support to the Mayor's Office for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, the Presidential Inauguration, the Commemoration and Remembrance at St. Peter's Episcopal Church and Many Helping Hands events.   Mayor Davis

3. That the City Manager and the Human Services Department work with non-profit and faith-based organizations to provide free meals on Sunday.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

4. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Director of the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to discuss ways to ban tandem tractor-trailers from entering the city.   Councillor vanBeuzekom
Referred to Public Safety Committee - vanBeuzekom

5. That the City Manager and the Mayor work with Harvard and MIT to draft a declaration of intent to create a Cambridge Compact for a Sustainable Future with a goal of signing such a Declaration on Earth Day 2013.   Mayor Davis, Councillor Cheung and Councillor vanBeuzekom

6. That the City Manager is requested to work with Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority officials and members of the Community Development Department's Transportation Planning team to determine how to increase the #47 bus capacity.   Councillor vanBeuzekom and Mayor Davis

7. That the City Council approve the response contained in Communications and Reports from City Officers Number One dated Dec 17, 2012 regarding an Open Meeting Law complaint and direct the City Clerk to forward said response to the Office of the Attorney General and Mr. Stohlman.   Mayor Davis

8. That City Council affirm the policy that every resident automobile is allowed to park in resident-only areas throughout the city regardless of where the car is principally garaged.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

9. That the City Manager is requested to communicate with the Department of Capital and Asset Management and report to the City Council the reasons for Leggat McCall being chosen as the developer of the Sullivan Courthouse, what zoning changes are needed and explanation of the process going forward with residents.   Councillor Toomey

10. City Council's request that in the next legislative session, there be a comprehensive national dialogue about reducing gun violence and improving mental health services.   Councillor vanBeuzekom and Councillor Reeves

11. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation to determine if safety improvements can be implemented at the intersection of First Street and Cambridge Street intersection and to report back to the City Council.   Councillor Toomey

12. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council on the preparation of language by the Law Department to create a Pathway Overlay District.   Councillor Toomey

COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS FROM CITY OFFICERS
1. A communication was received from Interim City Clerk Donna P. Lopez transmitting the response to an Open Meeting Law Complaint.

DECEMBER 13, 2012

TO: THE HONORABLE, THE CITY COUNCIL

FROM: DONNA P. LOPEZ, INTERIM CITY CLERK

SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO OPEN MEETING LAW COMPLAINT

Policy Order Number Nine of December 10, 2012 requested that the City Clerk, in consultation with the Law Department, draft a response regarding an Open Meeting Law complaint for the City Council's consideration at its December 17th City Council meeting in order to comply with the December 21,2012 deadline.

Attached you will find the response for your consideration.

---

December 17, 2012

Amy Nable, Assistant Attorney General
Director of Division of Open Government
Office of the Attorney General
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108

Re: Action taken by Cambridge City Council on Open Meeting Law complaint of Tom Stohlman dated December 4, 2012

Dear Ms. Nable:

On behalf of the Cambridge City Council, I am writing to advise you pursuant to 940 CMR 29.05(5) of the action taken by the City Council on the Open Meeting Law complaint of Tom Stohlman. As required, a copy of Mr. Stohlman's complaint dated December 4,2012 is attached as Exhibit A. The complaint challenges one particular instance of the City Clerk's longstanding practice, when requested, of e-mailing City Council Orders to other City Councilors prior to the City Council's agenda being set for the meeting and asking them to inform her whether they would like their name attached to any such Orders. Mr. Stohlman alleges that this constitutes serial deliberation in violation of the Open Meeting Law. The City Council disagrees for the reasons stated herein.

On December 10, Mr. Stohlman filed a supplement to his complaint of December 4, 2012. He asked that it be considered along with the December 4 complaint. See copy attached as Exhibit B. In the supplement, he alleges that a quorum of a City Council committee violated the Open Meeting Law by creating the particular policy order he is focused on outside of a duly convened open meeting. The City Council disagrees for the reasons stated herein.

FACTS¹

Facts Pertinent to the December 4 Complaint. The Cambridge City Council is composed of nine Councilors. Five Councilors constitute a quorum. The full City Council usually meets weekly on Monday evenings throughout the year, except on legal holidays and not during July and August, except for one special meeting usually held at the end of July. The City Clerk creates the City Council agenda for each meeting, including materials received every week from the City Manager, from City Councilors, and from citizens who wish to communicate in writing with the City Council. The City Clerk posts the entire City Council agenda on-line each week at approximately 5:00pm on the Thursday before the following Monday night public meeting, where it is available to the general public as well as to Councilors. In addition, a paper package of the entire City Council agenda is hand-delivered to each City Councilor on the Friday before the Monday meeting.

1. The City Council does not dispute the facts stated by Mr. Stohlman in his December 4 complaint describing the procedure he is challenging. However, the City Council believes that the fuller explanation of the facts stated in this section will provide a more complete picture of the matter at issue. The City Council disputes the conclusions drawn by Mr. Stohlman from the facts he stated.

For several years it has been the practice of the City Clerk, when requested by a City Councilor, to e-mail policy orders crafted outside of a public meeting by one or more, but less than a quorum of, City Councilors to all other City Councilors before putting together the City Council agenda for the public meeting at which such policy orders are to be considered. In the emails, the City Clerk asks City Councilors whether they would like to have their names listed on particular policy orders. The prior City Clerk, Margaret Drury, advised Councilors in 2008 and again in 2011 via e-mail that Councilors should keep in mind that they would be in violation of the Open Meeting Law if they e-mailed fellow Councilors asking them whether they wanted to be named on a Council Order and if a quorum then was created by Councilors responding directly to the Councillors sending such an e-mail. Ms. Drury advised that a serial deliberation of this nature would not occur if the City Clerk sent the e-mail to the other Councilors who did not sponsor an order and if these other Councilors responded to the City Clerk, and not to each other. See e-mails of Margaret Drury dated February 7, 2008 and November 25, 2011 attached as Exhibits C and D respectively.

The particular incident complained of by Mr. Stohlman occurred in compliance with the procedure prescribed by Ms. Drury as the longstanding practice of the City Clerk's Office. As alleged by Mr. Stohlman, four City Councilors (less than a quorum) crafted a policy order concerning the appointment of a new City Manager (Policy Order O-6 of December 3, 2012). Copy attached as Exhibit E. Policy Order O-6 was given to the City Clerk, who, as requested by one of the four City Councilors who crafted the Order, forwarded it to the five other City Councilors with an e-mail asking if any would like his/her name listed on it, and if so, to respond directly to the City Clerk or her assistant. Two of the five other Councilors responded timely to the City Clerk asking that their names be added to the Policy Order, bringing the total number of Councilors listed on the Policy Order to six.

Policy Order O-6 of December 3 was included by the Clerk in the Council's meeting agenda. The meeting agenda for the December 3 meeting could not be posted on-line on Thursday evening, November 29, because City Hall suffered a power outage along with a large portion of Cambridge in the late afternoon that day. The meeting agenda was posted on-line early Friday morning instead. The posted agenda contained Policy Order O-6 with the list of six Councilors who wanted their names to appear on it. At that time, City Councilors and any member of the general public with access to the internet could learn for the first time which Councilors' names appeared on any of the policy orders to be considered at the December 3 Council meeting. Later on Friday November 30, the paper packages with the meeting agendas were delivered to each Councilor personally.

The City Council deliberated on Policy Order O-6 at its meeting of December 3. At the beginning of the meeting, there were many members of the public who spoke to Policy Order O-6, both for and against. Later at the meeting, many Councilors spoke at length about the merits of Policy Order O-6. After the deliberation ended, Councilors voted on Policy Order O-6, with eight in favor and one against. Two subsidiary motions concerning Policy Order O-6 were made at the meeting and voted on by the Councilors as well.

As illustrated by the vote on Policy Order O-6, whether or not a Councilor is listed on a Policy Order is not an accurate indicator of how a Councilor will vote on the matter after deliberation at a Council meeting. The vote on Policy Order O-6 shows that the absence of a Councilor's name from a policy order does not mean that the Councilor whose name is absent is against the policy order. Two Councilors whose names were not on Policy Order O-6 voted in favor of it. Conversely, the presence of a Councilor's name on a Policy Order does not mean the Councilor will vote in favor of it. Attached is a copy of Policy Order O-10 from September 10, 2012 which lists all nine Councilors on it. On the bottom of the page, there is a City Clerk attestation that the Order was adopted by the affirmative vote of six members. Copy attached as Exhibit F. Policy Order O-5 of April 23, 2012 lists six Councilors. Copy attached as Exhibit G. As indicated on the attached record of the vote, that Order passed on a five to two vote with one abstention; one of the listed Councilors was recorded on a roll call vote as abstaining on the Order, even though he had asked that his name appear on it. Additionally, Amended Order O-5 of January 23, 2012 lists all nine Councilors, yet one listed Councilor voted against it. Copy attached as Exhibit H.

Policy Order O-6 was not discussed or decided by a quorum of Councilors until the public meeting on December 3.

Facts Pertinent to the December 10 Supplemental Complaint.² In the supplemental complaint, Mr. Stohlman refers to Policy Order O-7 of March 19, 2012 which among other things orders that the City Council's Government Operations and Rules Committee begin developing succession plans for the City Manager position. The Government Operations and Rules Committee is a standing City Council committee composed of five City Councilors, David Maher, Leland Cheung, Denise Simmons, Tim Toomey, and Minka vanBeuzekom. Mr. Stohlman alleges that a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, being three of the five of its members, crafted Policy Order O-6 outside of an open meeting in violation of law. The four Councilors who crafted Policy Order O-6 were Councilors Maher, Cheung, Toomey and Reeves. Councilor Reeves is not a member of the Committee.

2. Although the December 10 supplemental complaint is technically defective for not being submitted on the required Open Meeting Law Complaint Form, it is responded to here in the hope that it will be resolved quickly along with the original December 4 complaint, which was on the required form. However, in making this response, the City Council does not waive any of its rights.

By vote of the full City Council on Policy Order O-13 of September 24, 2012, the City Council voted in part "that all meetings of the Government Operations and Rules Committee dealing with the subject of the selection of a City Manager shall be considered a committee of the whole." A copy of Policy Order O-13 of September 24, 2012 is attached as Exhibit I. That vote meant that on the subject of the selection of a City Manager, the City Council had transformed the Government Operations and Rules Committee into a committee comprised of all nine City Councilors.

DISCUSSION

1. The City Clerk's practice of contacting City Councilors about policy orders does not constitute serial deliberation in violation of the Open Meeting Law.

Contrary to Mr. Stohlman's allegations, the City Clerk's and City Council's practice regarding the distribution of policy orders to be considered at the City Council's public meeting does not constitute deliberation in violation of the Open Meeting Law. G.L.c.30A, §18 defines "Deliberation" as:

an oral or written communication through any medium, including electronic mail, between or among a quorum of a public body on any public business within its jurisdiction; provided, however, that 'deliberation' shall not include the distribution of a meeting agenda, scheduling information or distribution of other procedural meeting [sic 1 or the distribution of reports or documents that may be discussed at a meeting, provided that no opinion of a member is expressed.

a. A quorum of Councilors did not communicate with each other on public business within its jurisdiction.

As stated above, a quorum of Councilors did not communicate with each other with regard to Policy Order O-6 and therefore did not deliberate on it. In accordance with its longstanding practice, with regard to Policy Order O-6 and some of the other policy orders on the agenda, Councilors communicated only with the City Clerk with regard to whether they wanted their names to appear on the orders when the orders were placed on the meeting agenda. They did not communicate with each other. They did not learn which other Councilors had their names placed on Policy Order O-6 until the same time as that information was made public by the City Clerk posting the meeting agenda on-line the last business day before the scheduled meeting. This was in accordance with instruction from the prior City Clerk who had advised the Council that this practice was in accord with the Open Meeting Law. Therefore, there was no deliberation between or among a quorum of the Council prior to the meeting.

b. The distribution of the meeting agenda with Policy Order O-6 did not express the opinion of Councilors on the Policy Order.

As stated in the definition quoted above, it is not a "deliberation" when a meeting agenda is distributed to a quorum of members as long as "no opinion of a member is expressed." Because, as stated above, the inclusion of a Councilor's name on a policy order is not an indication of how that Councilor is going to vote on the order at the public meeting, it is not the expression of an opinion on the matter. The only thing the inclusion of a Councilor's name indicates is that the Councilor supports bringing the policy order forward at the public meeting. The examples stated above illustrate that the absence of Councilors' names from a policy order does not mean that they will vote against it, and the presence of Councilors' names does not mean that they will vote for it.

2. The Supplemental Complaint fails because a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee did not craft Policy Order O-6.

In his supplemental complaint, Mr. Stohlman erroneously asserts that a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee crafted Policy Order O-6. As stated in the facts above, by formal vote in September 2012 the Government Operations and Rules Committee was made a committee of the whole City Council when it was dealing with the selection of a City Manager. That meant that the Committee was comprised of all nine City Councilors, and that therefore a quorum of the Committee was five City Councilors. "Quorum" is defined in G.L.c.30A, §18 as "a simple majority of the members of the public body .... " Less than a quorum, being four City Councilors, crafted Policy Order O-6, so there was no violation.

Mr. Stohlman also erroneously assumes that the four City Councilors were acting as members of the Government Operations and Rules Committee when they crafted Policy Order O-6. Mr. Stohlman's basis for this assumption is Policy Order O-7 of March 19, 2012, which states that the Committee should develop "succession plans" for the City Manager. However, that Order does not state that any City Councilors who present a policy order regarding appointment of a new City Manager must be deemed to be doing so only as members of the Committee. Policy Order O-7 of March 19, 2012 does not prohibit City Councilors from acting as members of the City Council when submitting policy orders to the City Council, including an order concerning a new City Manager. Mr. Stohlman ascribes an unjustifiably strict meaning to Policy Order O-7 of March 19, 2012 which the City Council rejects. The facts that one of the four City Councilors who crafted Policy Order O-6 is not a regular member of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, and that two of the regular members of the Committee were not involved with crafting Policy Order O-6, indicate that the four Councilors who did craft Policy Order O-6 did not view themselves as working together as part of the five-member standing Committee. The four City Councilors who crafted Policy Order O-6 were neither a quorum of the Committee of the whole, nor of the City Council.

3. Even if the practices complained of were violations of the Open Meeting Law, the Councilors' adoption of Policy Order O-6 should stand because the issue was fully heard and debated at the public meeting on December 3.

Even if the Policy Order sponsorship process used for years by the City Council were to constitute a serial deliberation in violation of the Open Meeting Law, or a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee crafted Policy Order O-6 outside of an open meeting, the remedy requested by Mr. Stohlman of requiring the City Council to re-vote the issue of whether Richard Rossi should be the next Cambridge City Manager is inappropriate and unnecessary. It appears that Mr. Stohlman requests a re-vote because of his mistaken belief that the issue was discussed and decided by a quorum of the City Council, or a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, outside of a public meeting. As stated above, neither a quorum of the City Council nor a quorum of the Government Operations and Rules Committee discussed the issue before the public meeting. Also, the mere presence of six of the Councilors' names on Policy Order O-6 does not mean that the issue was decided by those six Councilors. As stated above, the presence or absence of a Councilor's name on a policy order does not mean that a Councilor will ultimately vote for or against the policy order.

However, even if a quorum of the City Councilor the Government Operations and Rules Committee had discussed and decided the issue outside of a public meeting, a re-vote on the same matter is uncalled for because subsequent independent deliberative action was taken in the full meeting that cured the previous violation/so Violations of the Open Meeting Law may be cured by subsequent independent deliberative action taken in a full meeting. McCrea v. Flaherty, 71 Mass.App.Ct. 637, 642 (2008). The lengthy public comment and debate by Councilors at the meeting on December 3 prior to the Council vote accomplished the purposes of the Open Meeting Law by airing the issue publicly among citizens and all Councilors after public notice. See, Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks, Lodge No. 65 V. City Council of Lawrence, 403 Mass. 563 (1988). An order to re-vote the issue would simply result in a repeat of what has already occurred-public notice that the issue will be considered, comment by the public at the public meeting, and a debate and vote by the same Councilors on the same issue. Nothing would be gained by such an exercise.

Also, it would be inconsistent to treat Policy Order O-6 differently from the many policy orders over many years that have come before the City Council in the same manner as did Policy Order O-6 and which have not and cannot be re-voted at this point.

As required by 940 CMR 29.05(5), the City Council reviewed the allegations of this Open Meeting Law complaint within 14 business days of receiving it. At its meeting of December 17, 2012, the City Council voted to adopt this letter as its response and resolution. Mr. Stohlman is being informed of the City Council's action by copy of this letter.

Very truly yours,
Donna P. Lopez
Interim City Clerk

cc. Tom Stohlman
19 Channing Street
Cambridge, MA 02138

HEARING SCHEDULE
Mon, Dec 17
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Tues, Dec 18
3:00pm   The Civic Unity Committee will conduct a public meeting to explore the Cambridge Police Department's practices and policies surrounding minority hires, promotions, and recruitment efforts.  (Sullivan Chamber)

Wed, Dec 19
10:00am   The Community Health Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss a ban on plastic bags.  (Sullivan Chamber)
4:30pm   The Government Operations and Rules Committee will conduct a public meeting to continue discussions as it relates to the City Council's desire for a visioning/search process for the City Manager. This meeting to be televised.  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Jan 7
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Wed, Jan 9
10:00am   The Community Health Committee will conduct a public meeting to discuss the soda ban.  (Sullivan Chamber)
4:00pm   The Ordinance Committee will conduct a public hearing on a City Council Zoning Petition, to amend the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by amending the Section 13.59.33 Building and Site Design Requirements for Active Uses and Open Spaces by deleting condition numbered (5) In order to promote pedestrian activity on adjacent public streets from tenants and employees within commercial buildings, any cafeteria serving such commercial space may be located only on the ground floor level of a building and must be opened to the public at least 20 hours per week. This hearing to be televised.  (Sullivan Chamber)

Thurs, Jan 10
2:00pm   Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Jan 14
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Jan 28
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Feb 4
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Feb 11
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Feb 25
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Mar 4
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Mar 11
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Mar 18
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Apr 1
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Apr 8
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Apr 22
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Apr 29
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, May 6
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, May 13
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, May 20
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, June 3
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, June 10
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, June 17
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, June 24
5:30pm   City Council Meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

TEXT OF ORDERS
O-1     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: Cambridge is home to many small businesses that help make Cambridge a desirable place to live and to visit; and
WHEREAS: Business owners that do not live in the city are not allowed to park in residential areas and are not allowed to park for extended periods of time at parking meters; and
WHEREAS: By making parking available at local city garages at a reduced rate for small business owners will help to prevent illegal parking by small businesses owners and also make more spaces available for customers and residents; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation and to work to establish a reduced small business parking rate for local business owners at city garages and to report back to the City Council.

O-2     Dec 17, 2012
MAYOR DAVIS
WHEREAS: Cambridge will celebrate Martin Luther King, Jr. Day on Mon, Jan 21, 2013; and
WHEREAS: City Hall will be open to welcome the community to view the Presidential Inauguration, the Peace Commission will sponsor a Commemoration and Remembrance at St. Peter's Episcopal Church and Many Helping Hands will sponsor volunteer activities at City Hall, the Senior Center and other sites; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to offer the necessary assistance to the Mayor's Office for these events.

O-3     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
WHEREAS: Cambridge has hundreds of homeless persons needing regular free community meals; and
WHEREAS: Many Cambridge faith communities and non-profits provide free meals to the homeless most days of the week; and
WHEREAS: There is currently no place where the homeless may receive a meal on Sundays in Cambridge; and
WHEREAS: It has proven difficult for many faith communities to provide the necessary volunteer workforce to do this given the religious nature of Sunday; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager and the Human Services Department work with non-profit and faith-based organizations to provide free meals on Sunday; and be it further
ORDERED: That this matter be referred to the Community Health Committee.

O-4     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
WHEREAS: Cambridge is viewed as an official Walking City and we strive to be bicycle-friendly as well; and
WHEREAS: Large freight trailers such as tractor-trailers, semi-trailers, flatbeds, tankers and tandem freight trailers have difficulty navigating the narrow, congested streets of Cambridge including major arteries; and
WHEREAS: At least two fatalities in Cambridge and two fatalities this year in Boston involved tractor-trailers; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Director of the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to discuss ways to ban tandem tractor-trailers from entering the city; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Director of the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department with the view in mind of requiring large freight vehicles of a certain size to transfer freight to a smaller vehicle before entering the city; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this matter.

O-5     Dec 17, 2012
MAYOR DAVIS
COUNCILLOR CHEUNG
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
WHEREAS: The City of Cambridge, MIT and Harvard University have had a history of success working together to advance sustainability in Cambridge; and
WHEREAS: The three organizations are now leading by example in pursuing projects in energy efficiency, renewable energy, waste management and promoting non-auto transportation amongst other efforts; and
WHEREAS: By joining forces the three organizations can accomplish more than by working independently; and
WHEREAS: By formalizing an agreement to collaborate, the three organizations will be more effective in engaging additional community partners in these efforts; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager and the Mayor work with Harvard and MIT to draft a declaration of intent to create a Cambridge Compact for a Sustainable Future with a goal of signing such a Declaration on Earth Day 2013.

O-6     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
MAYOR DAVIS
WHEREAS: A robust and well-functioning public transit system is critical to the continued growth of Cambridge; and
WHEREAS: Central Square is one of the busiest transit hubs in the Metro-Boston region; and
WHEREAS: The #47 bus is frequently over capacity, especially in the evening; and
WHEREAS: The CT2 bus has a partially overlapping schedule through Cambridgeport; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority officials and members of the Community Development Department's Transportation Planning team to determine how to increase the #47 bus capacity.

O-7     Dec 17, 2012
MAYOR DAVIS
ORDERED: That the City Council approve the response contained in Communications and Reports from City Officers Number One dated Dec 17, 2012 regarding an Open Meeting Law complaint and direct the City Clerk to forward said response to the Office of the Attorney General and Mr. Stohlman.

O-8     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
WHEREAS: Almost all of the streets of Cambridge are in the public domain; and
WHEREAS: All residents who own automobiles principally garaged in Cambridge are allowed to apply for an annual resident parking sticker ("Resident Automobile"); and
WHEREAS: All resident automobiles are allowed to park on any public, resident-only street anywhere in Cambridge; and
WHEREAS: Some neighborhoods close to MBTA stations, places of high employment, bordering communities or bridges to Boston feel unfairly burdened by resident automobiles from other parts of the city parking in their neighborhood; and
WHEREAS: The Cambridge City Council governs the disposition of the public streets; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That City Council affirm the policy that every resident automobile is allowed to park in resident-only areas throughout the city regardless of where the car is principally garaged; and be it further
ORDERED: That no resident or business may prevent a "resident automobile" from parking in their neighborhood by means of sign, traffic cone, chair or other means.

O-9     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: It has come to the attention of the City Council that the Department of Capital and Asset Management (DCAM) has come to a decision on the sale of the Sullivan Courthouse; and
WHEREAS: Community involvement in the renovation of the Sullivan Courthouse is imperative; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Assistant City Manager of the Community Development Department and report back on what zoning changes will be needed in order for the renovation to take place as proposed to DCAM; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to communicate with the DCAM and report to the City Council the reasons for Leggat McCall being chosen as the developer; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to communicate to Legall McCall that they should meet with residents as soon as possible to explain the process going forward.

O-10     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
COUNCILLOR REEVES
WHEREAS: Hearts have been wrenched as a result of the horrific and senseless shooting of innocent children and adults on December 14 of this year in Newtown, Connecticut; and
WHEREAS: Each day in the United States there are an average of more than 75 tragic fatalities due to gun violence including suicides, homicides and accidents; and
WHEREAS: At least ten fatalities in Cambridge in the past five years were caused by firearms and several at the hands of mentally unstable individuals; and
WHEREAS: At the national level, a reasoned and measured dialogue about improving widespread mental health services and reducing the availability of semi-automatic guns is missing; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Clerk be and hereby is requested to forward this resolution to the Cambridge Legislative Delegation, Representative Capuano, Representative Markey, Senator Kerry and Senator Warren noting the City Council's request that in the next legislative session, there be a comprehensive national dialogue about reducing gun violence and improving mental health services.

O-11     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: The intersection of First Street and Cambridge Street continues to be difficult for both pedestrians and cars to navigate; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Director of Traffic, Parking and Transportation to determine if safety improvements can be implemented at this intersection and to report back to the City Council.

O-12     Dec 17, 2012
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: Policy Order #28 adopted on September 10, 2012, attached, requires the Law Department to create a Pathway Overlay District; and
WHEREAS: To date, there has been no response; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on this order.

AWAITING REPORT LIST
12-02. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the repair of all street lights that are not working in Cambridge.
Vice Mayor Simmons and Full Membership 01/23/12 (O-1)

12-08. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on instituting a ban on plastic bags.
Councillor Decker, Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 01/23/12 (O-10)

12-20. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on what steps the City will take to help the general public keep track of awaiting maintenance issues on things like park equipment, graffiti, sidewalks, etc.
Councillor Kelley, Councillor Decker, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Maher, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor Toomey 02/13/12 (O-4)

12-29. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the no left turn on the Cambridge Common and to remove the bicycle prohibition on certain streets, such as Whittemore Avenue. Referred back for additional information on 3/5/2012.
Councillor Kelley 02/13/12 (O-17)

12-40. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on improper leases and rental of owned affordable housing units. Reconsideration filed by Councillor Toomey on 6/11/2012. Report referred back to City Manager for more information on motion of Councillor Toomey on 6/18/12.
Councillor Reeves, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor vanBeuzekom 03/19/12 (O-3)

12-51. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the feasibility of finding additional office space for the City Council.
Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Reeves & Councillor vanBeuzekom 04/23/12 (O-5)

12-54. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on how to establish an Community Choice Aggregation Network which will engage in electricity procurement for the entire City of Cambridge.
Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 04/23/12 (O-9)

12-64. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on current status of the Inlet Bridge and what steps the City can take to ensure that agreements with the Commonwealth are upheld.
Councillor Toomey and Full Membership 05/21/12 (O-1)

12-65. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on an explanation as the when the main library will be open on Sundays.
Councillor vanBeuzekom, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor Toomey 05/21/12 (O-2)

12-67. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #2
RE: report on implementing a ban on trucks transporting hazardous materials through the City.
Councillor Cheung 05/21/12 (O-5)

12-71. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the possibility of converting the vacant lots at the corner of Watson and Brookline Streets and at 35 Cherry Street to community gardens or open space.
Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toomey & Councillor vanBeuzekom 06/04/12 (O-10)

12-74. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the feasibility of expanding the barbeque pilot program in parks throughout Cambridge.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 06/04/12 (O-13)

12-75. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the feasibility of providing a map of long term parking spots for rent on the city website.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 06/04/12 (O-16)

12-78. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on expanding the number of Cambridge parks/playing fields with public toilets. Referred back to the City Manager on 6/18/12 on motion of Councillor Kelley.
Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 06/11/12 (O-5)

12-81. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on meeting with No. Mass Avenue neighbors, businesses and neighborhood groups about whether additional alterations to the median strip would be appropriate.
Councillor Kelley and Full Membership 06/11/12 (O-9)

12-85. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on installing security cameras in the Donnelly Field area.
Councillor Toomey and Full Membership 06/11/12 (O-14)

12-87. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the potential uses of the Foundry Building.
Councillor Toomey 06/04/12 (O-19)

12-90. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on Executive Session to discuss lawsuits.
Councillor Reeves and Full Membership 07/30/12 (O-5)

12-91. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the installation of lower and decorative lighting along Cardinal Medeiros Avenue.
Councillor Toomey and Full Membership 07/30/12 (O-6)

12-99. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #4
RE: report on statistical information regarding enforcement citations for loud motorcycle mufflers, car radios and the City's plan to address these issues.
Councillor Kelley and Full Membership 07/30/12 (O-16)

12-104. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on data requested on the Andrews Petition during an Ordinance Committee hearing last term that has not yet been received.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 07/30/12 (O-34)

12-105. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on answering questions regarding the Foundry Building in order to move the community process forward.
Councillor Cheung & Councillor Toomey 07/30/12 (O-35)

12-106. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on facilitating affordable housing opportunities for middle class families.
Councillor Toomey and Full Membership 09/10/12 (O-13)

12-107. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the number of Cambridge residents that are working as part of organized labor on development projects along with the percentage of minority and women members and what sort of communication takes place with the Rindge School of Technical Arts and local Unions.
Councillor Toomey and Full Membership 09/10/12 (O-14)

12-108. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on applying and participating in the Cities of Services program.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 09/10/12 (O-19)

12-109. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on what strategies other cities have used to dissuade land-banking.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 09/10/12 (O-21)

12-111. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on improving pedestrian safety on Western Avenue at Kinnaird and Pleasant Streets.
Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 09/10/12 (O-24)

12-115. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on making accommodations for voters when elevators are not working or there are other barriers at polling locations on election days. Referred back for additional information by Councillor Decker on 10/22/2012. Further report provided and referred back by Councillor Decker on 11/5/2012.
Councillor Decker, Mayor Davis, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toomey & Councillor vanBeuzekom 09/24/12 (O-6)

12-116. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #11
RE: report on maintaining the present Central Square Farmer's Market permit rate despite an increase in the vehicle parking rates.
Councillor vanBeuzekom, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor Toomey 09/24/12 (O-8)

12-120. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the possibility of creating a municipal exterminator and/or contracting exterminators to help eradicate rodent problems in the City.
Councillor Toomey, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor vanBeuzekom 10/01/12 (O-3)

12-123. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on suggestions to control the rodent population.
Councillor vanBeuzekom, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor Toomey 10/22/12 (O-3)

12-124. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on feasibility of finding additional secure locations for the disposal of prescription drugs.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 11/05/12 (O-4)

12-125. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on feasibility of installing recycling bins adjacent to trash bins.
Councillor Cheung, Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 11/05/12 (O-5)

12-126. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the feasibility of ensuring all city sponsored committee hearings (such as the E-gov committee) are available online.
Councillor Cheung, Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 11/05/12 (O-6)

12-128. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on creating a pilot program for installing mini exercise stations on major walking routes throughout the City.
Mayor Davis, Councillor Cheung, Councillor Decker, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toomey & Councillor vanBeuzekom 11/19/12 (O-1)

12-129. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on installation of additional public drinking fountains working in conjunction with the Arts Council on interesting designs.
Mayor Davis, Councillor Cheung, Councillor Decker, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toomey & Councillor vanBeuzekom 11/19/12 (O-2)

12-130. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on developing a process to promote universal design and visitability in all Cambridge Public buildings.
Mayor Davis and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-3)

12-131. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #5
RE: report on possible advantages of the "preservation easement" process.
Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-6)

12-132. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on incorporating permanent bathroom facilities at the Cambridge Common; conduct a study for permanent bathroom facilities in all public squares; and provide a list of all locations where portable bathroom facilities are currently used.
Councillor Kelley, Councillor vanBeuzekom, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves & Vice Mayor Simmons 11/19/12 (O-8)

12-133. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on preparing language to amendment the Municipal code banning polystyrene-based disposable food containers.
Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-10)

12-134. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #6
RE: report on what policies exist to protect individuals awaiting the opening of the Cambridge Senior Center during extreme weather conditions.
Vice Mayor Simmons, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Councillor Toomey & Councillor vanBeuzekom 11/19/12 (O-12)

12-135. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on preparing an ordinance regulating procedures that organizations would have to follow in the event of a concussion.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-13)

12-136. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on a plan of action to reinforce and secure restaurant bins in a way that separates food waste for composting.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-14)

12-137. Report from the City Manager:  See Mgr #3
RE: report on an analysis of the entire past election of wait times and strategies for what would be necessary to reduce wait times to less than 10 minutes and on making information available on wait times at polling locations throughout the day.
Councillor Cheung, Councillor vanBeuzekom, Mayor Davis, Councillor Decker, Councillor Kelley, Councillor Maher, Councillor Reeves, Vice Mayor Simmons & Councillor Toomey 11/19/12 (O-16)

12-140. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on special permit process pursuant to MGL 40A as it relates to the impact of re-filing a zoning petition on pending special permits for special permits that have been granted.
Councillor Kelley and Full Membership 11/19/12 (O-9)

12-141. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on improving safety concerns at the Kennedy-Longfellow School and the MLK School.
Vice Mayor Simmons and Full Membership 12/03/12 (O-1)

12-142. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on audio and visual upgrades/equipment in the Sullivan Chamber and other meeting spaces.
Councillor Reeves and Full Membership 12/03/12 (O-7)

12-143. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on the cause and other details of the Nov 29, 2012 power outage.
Mayor Davis and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-4)

12-144. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on implementing speed control measures at the intersection of Brookline and Erie Streets.
Vice Mayor Simmons and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-6)

12-145. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on how the city might provide a reduced rate Hubway bike-share membership to its limited income residents.
Councillor vanBeuzekom and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-7)

12-146. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on conducting an inventory of school playgrounds for current safety issues and suitability of playground equipment for the age groups being served.
Mayor Davis and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-10)

12-147. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on neighborhoods that are impacted by the Alewife Sewer Separation project now being concerned with bump-outs that will reduce parking options.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-11)

12-148. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on including information that donations to the Scholarship Fund are tax-deductible in the solicitation letters.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-12)

12-149. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on possibility of posting "no truck traffic" signs on Roberts Road.
Councillor Cheung and Full Membership 12/10/12 (O-14)

12-150. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on convening a task force to look into the creation of providing permanent public restrooms at high volume locations such as public parks and squares.
Mayor Davis 12/10/12 (O-16)

12-151. Report from the City Manager:
RE: report on installing pedestrian crossing traffic cones at the intersections of Windsor, Sciarappa and Fifth Streets at Cambridge Street.
Councillor Toomey 12/10/12 (O-17)