Mayor's Arts Task Force - Meeting #6 Notes
(as reported for the Mar 25, 2019 Cambridge City Council meeting)

Mayor’s Arts Task Force Meeting #6
Licensing and Permitting
Date: Mar 13th, 2019
Location: Cambridge Community Foundation

Meeting began at 5:43pm

Members of the Task Force in attendance: Alanna Mallon, Chair; Liana Ascolese, Aide to Councillor Mallon and Executive Assistant to the Task Force; Afiyah Harrigan, Mayor’s Office Liaison; Jason Weeks, Executive Director of the Cambridge Arts Council; Geeta Pradhan, President and CEO of the Cambridge Community Foundation; Katherine Shozawa, Lesley University; Khalil Mogassabi, Development Director and Chief Planner, Community Development Department; Lisa Peterson, Deputy City Manager, Peter DiMuro, Executive Director of the Dance Complex, Kristina Latino, CEO of Cornerscape; Kelly Sherman, visual artist and consultant; Michael Monestime, Executive Director of the Central Square Business Association; David De Celis, Public Arts Commission; Sarah Gallop, Government Relations at MIT; Ben Simon, musician and member of the Cambridge Arts Coalition.

In attendance as guest speakers were Nicole Murati-Ferrer, Chair of the License Commission and Pardis Saffari, Senior Economic Development Manager.

Councillor Mallon welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked them for coming. Tonight’s topic is on licensing and permitting and introduced Nicole Murati-Ferrer, the Chair of the License Commission, and Pardis Saffari, the Senior Economic Development Manager from the Economic Development Department. She stated that almost everyone on the Task Force had referenced the licensing and permitting process as a barrier to arts in her initial phone calls with members to set the agenda of the task force. Artists were asking for clarity and help.

Councillor Mallon wanted to do a quick recap of what the Task Force has accomplished so far. We had a previous meeting on funding where we discussed the 1% for arts ordinance not being capped at $100,000 but instead allocated at the full 1% of the hard construction costs. She stated that Lisa Peterson had a big announcement about this.

Ms. Peterson stated that there was a meeting with the City Council and School Committee regarding the Tobin and Vassal Lane school construction, which is estimated at a total cost of $250 million with construction costs at $200 million. She announced that the City Manager has committed to a full 1% for arts in this project, bringing the total for art to almost $2 million. She stated that in the ordinance conversation there was discussion of an arts fund, so we are not envisioning that the whole $2 million be site-specific to art at the school, but that some of the money would go into an established fund to be distributed as arts-grants for projects in other areas of the City as well.

Councillor Mallon thanked Ms. Peterson for her commitment and announcement. She stated that the City Manager would be looking to the Arts Task Force for guidelines on what to do with the full 1% of the incoming Tobin funding. She informed the Task Force that there would be updates coming shortly regarding allocations from the hotel/motel taxes, and that when we get to the conversation about the Cultural District, we will be talking about how the City may help support that in a bigger way.

Councillor Mallon stated that last month we talked about zoning in the Cultural District, and that she and Liana were putting together some definitions and zoning language to incorporate into the Cultural District that we’ll be more prepared to talk about at the next meeting. It’s important to get this to the Council so that we’re getting work done and not waiting until the end for recommendations.

Councillor Mallon welcomed Nicole and Pardis again and went over some housekeeping items and meeting procedures including Malia’s Rules to familiarize our guests with them.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer introduced herself as Chair of the License Commission and stated that they issue different types of licenses related to one-day and annual entertainment for businesses under Chapter 138 (alcohol) and Chapter 140 (restaurants and hotels).

Ms. Saffari introduced herself as the Senior Economic Development Manager who helps entrepreneurs and small business owners either get started, grow, come to, or stay in Cambridge. Her department offers workshops as well as educational and technical assistance.

Councillor Mallon informed the task force that she had an initial meeting with Ms. Murati-Ferrer to talk about the needs of artists and arts organizations in Cambridge, and there were a few things that came out of that. There is no one stop shop to encompass artists and everything they need from the Licensing Department, Inspectional Services Department, Arts Council, and more. Other municipalities have this, but in Cambridge it’s hard to navigate especially if you’re new to the system or not used to it. She asked Ms. Latino to kick us off to talk about whether permitting could be more nimble for the arts, particularly for music.

Ms. Latino stated that her organization hosts multidisciplinary, intimate pop-up music events, usually featuring acoustic musicians in Cambridge, Somerville, Boston, and Greater Boston, so she has had a taste of different permitting experiences. She stated that her #1 challenge is getting different answers from different people across departments about what is needed for events. She stated that if local creative people feel that if what you’re doing is small enough, it’s easier to fly under the radar that seek out the appropriate license, which creates a snowball effect. Artists who try to do the right thing and get a license sometimes find that they have bitten off more than they can chew when it comes to a simple event with 25 people and a guitar. She stated that we should democratize hosting small, low volume, intimate events and make the process clear for people who only want to host occasional events. These events are better for the City, but organizers have been frustrated when asking about events and getting conflicting answers. There’s a level of confusion even if you’ve been doing it for a while and you never quite know what you’re going to encounter when putting on an event.

Councillor Mallon stated that many events want to have small music portions but don’t want to deal with licensing, so they just don’t have music and this is a missed opportunity. She asked if anyone else had concerns.

Mr. DiMuro stated that there are lots of shifts in the process. For example, the Dance Complex had a $1 fee per year and now it’s $1,000, and wondered if he should even be paying $1,500. He stated that a one size fits all approach doesn’t work when it comes to permitting. For the Dance Complex, they are a non-profit, maker community with a small 100 seat theater that they try to cap at 85 people so that the space isn’t uncomfortable. He would like to see encouragement of the maker community, and that people should be encouraged to see dance through low costs.

Ms. Latino stated that one additional challenge is that artists can get around the licensing process by hosting events in a private space and not charging for tickets. Many artists do this to create rich, creative community because they don’t have to pursue licenses and instead operate as donation-based, but this holds them back from getting paid. In order not to get a license, you can’t charge for access or publicly advertise, which holds so many careers back. We need to encourage artists to take the leap, but many can’t incur additional expenses or the administrative hassle to collect money for sharing their talents.

Mr. De Celis thanked Mr. DiMuro for bringing up his point, and asked if there was a separate licensing category for non-profits. He asked how they are called out, treated differently, and if they are not, could they be treated different. He wanted to discuss distinguishing non-profits as a separate category.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that Ms. Latino was talking about one day entertainment licenses while Mr. DiMuro was talking about annual licenses. She spoke to Kristina’s concerns first, saying that she can’t speak to other municipalities and their challenges, but generally they are all equally as frustrated with Chapter 140 and the way they have to license under it, and some have even tried to introduce legislation to clean up 140 under the State Legislature. She stated that in terms of one day licenses she doesn’t disagree that it can be bureaucratic but that in Cambridge we’ve done a good job of trying to get rid of that. The online permitting system is a few clicks for the applicant who doesn’t have to physically come to the Police Station and bring back paperwork. The board does have to vote at a public meeting which can be a little infuriating because you have to plan that in advance, but she stated that there was an emergency need today where a woman got a last minute license because the commission did everything in their power to hold a same day vote, and she got a license in 35 minutes. She stated the process is not perfect but more City departments are getting on their online viewpoint platform and the process will be easier to centralize.

She moved on to Mr. DiMuro’s example, stating that years ago the Dance Complex had asked for a fee waiver but instead the board had granted them at $1 license fee for one year which ended up carrying over for multiple years. This came out in a recent audit which is why their bill went up significantly. The board had done a comprehensive review of fees so that they all made sense. For example. they used to license whether you had a CD, iPod, or radio which did not make sense, so that was gotten rid of. She stated that they did contemplate doing a nonprofit category but did not go through with it because then nonprofits such as universities would not have to pay fees. She stated that the commission did get a legal opinion stating a nonprofit category was not a good idea for this reason, however they did get rid of many fees which they thought were not tied to specific services or were unnecessary. They also rolled back fees that were too high, like paying $500 for poetry, and tied it to the actual costs of permitting and enforcement.

Councillor Mallon asked to revisit the Solicitor’s decision, and if there was a way to differentiate between a nonprofit like the Dance Complex and a nonprofit like MIT.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that she would be happy to do that but that it had been discussed as a difficult, slippery slope because there is no legal distinction between a 501c3 such as the Dance Complex and a 501c3 like MIT, so that the City might be creating a category that courts think is discriminatory and capricious.

Mr. DiMuro stated that because of licensing we’ve gotten into so much more regulation. He stated that in a different era when the Dance Complex was created, so now it’s harder to instill those rules in regulations in artists that do want to be “corporate.” He asked what we could do as a body to support organizations that fall under this category and the difference between profitable and not profitable organizations.

Councillor Mallon stated that multi-use facilities are subject to more fees, and small organizations have found the process onerous. She asked if there was a way to think about having a multi-use category with a fee cap so that poetry, trivia, videogames, etc. were all covered under one category. She referenced a gallery in Central Square that came to her to talk about this, which made its artists apply for a one day permit every time they wanted to host an event to avoid bureaucracy, which actually just makes more work for the commission. She asked how we show old movies, dance, and make art all in one space to cultivate Cambridge as a place welcoming to arts organizations.

Ms. Sherman was reminded about the last conversation about zoning and referenced how Mr. Roberts stated that we should keep things more open to scenarios that we didn’t anticipate. She stated that she looks at the Boston acoustic performers’ ordinance as more of a blanket statement that they are open - they start with openness and then figure out which things need to be restricted. She asked what the scenario is that really does trigger a need for having licensing, and whether it was the scale of the event or the institution hosting it.

Mr. DiMuro stated that the categories were written in 1884 when the Dance Complex was built, and that their content is different than what MIT does and is a real thing to look at rather than just a blanket 501c3 category.

Ms. Pradhan stated that the IRS has different accounting rules for small organizations under a $500,000 operating budget, and understood the slippery slope but was wondering about the possibility of an organization being under or over a certain size having a different set of rules. She stated that there was a precedent because of how people report finances and what accounting they have to do. She stated we should look at this if we want to animate the City with social capital and opportunities for relationship building and connection with the arts.

Ms. Latino asked what the closest thing Cambridge has to Boston’s acoustic music ordinance?

Councillor Mallon answered that the City Council just reintroduced an order to bring forth this ordinance here. She stated that Boston has been very successful in enlivening arts and this also helps businesses succeed, because they don’t have to apply for a permit every time they want to have an event.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that the response to this order was circulating internally and there may be some legal matters different than Boston. She stated that Cambridge is more dense and zoning is a bigger issue because Cambridge is mostly zoned as residential. She referenced the Sunset Cafe and that they had a fantastic concept for music but that they weren’t zoned for it aside from once a month as an accessory use. She stated that she understood zoning is a serious hurdle in Cambridge. She stated that Boston’s ordinance had a sunset clause in 2017 but they have removed it. They do not track who takes advantage of the ordinance but they know that some are using it, as it applies to all types of businesses - hardware stores, supermarkets, etc., not just galleries, dance, and restaurants.

Councillor Mallon clarified that a sunset clause is an ordinance that gets put in with an end date and revisited, but that it can be removed if there’s no major problem.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that the first draft said effective immediately and ended in December 2017. She stated that in November 2017 Boston removed the clause and the ordinance is now permanent. She discussed that they had talked about petitioning the state for permitting changes but that had never happened, but perhaps it’s still in the pipeline.

Councillor Mallon asked whether the ordinance applied to inside or outside businesses, as some people had concerns about sidewalk cafes.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that if Cambridge did something like this it would be based on State law and zoning, and that one thing to consider is the street performer ordinance and perhaps limit the acoustic music ordinance to inside so as not to encroach on street performers.

Mr. Weeks stated that he frequently saw people do outdoor cafes with canned music that encroached on street performers.

Councillor Mallon moved on to a different topic, stating that there was no middle ground in permits between one day and annual. She reference Spaceus, who is in one place for three months and then another for three months. She asked Ms. Saffari to speak to retail strategy and how to activate vacant fronts with the arts with permitting in mind.

Ms. Saffari stated that the Inspectional Services Department (ISD) allows temporary occupancy and use permits, but that organizations need to be cautious, because permits are for the space that they are in, they cannot move across the City without being reissued. She stated this also applies when the manager of a business changes and they need a new license because it’s now under a different person, and talked about retail additions to zoning. She stated that this won’t change the opportunity to change space requirements, however.

Ms. Latino asked what a temporary occupancy permit covered.

Ms. Saffari answered that in the example of Spaceus, they will have a permit to display or sell art in one space, and then they have to get a new permit for the same activity somewhere else.

Ms. Latino stated that a big part of the Spaceus mission is that they host events at night and asked whether it was possible to get a temporary use permit to cover that as well. She stated that right now it seemed like that requires a separate one day use permit.

Councillor Mallon stated that when she spoke to the operators of Spaceus they informed her that they had poetry but they close it off to members of the public so that they don’t have to get a permit, which is a lost opportunity to have publicity.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer clarified that there was no one day license for poetry, it’s only for activities that are amplified such as live theater, disco, light shows, dancing by patrons. She stated that there are no one day permits for a one-off poetry night or trivia, and that the commission just concentrates on activities they think would generate a noise complaint and draw large crowds. They are not licensing things like trivia for one night in a gallery. She clarified that there are two different departments that issue temporary use permits, them and the health department which she cannot speak to. She stated that there were two different permits: one day vs. a chunk of time. She did not have a comparable example to Spaceus but referenced a group of dancers who wanted to do 10 performances over a period of time. She stated that they just submitted one application and that served as their charge for 10 performances. She stated that she had not seen the board consider a 3 month temporary license, and advised the group to stay away from that as much as possible, because for a one day license you do not have to go through zoning, whereas you do for a 3 month temporary license.

Councillor Mallon asked about the fee structure and how that was clear when applying.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated they didn’t advertise that, but it is possible to request relief or waivers and the board will look into it. They have said no in the past but sometimes give breaks to groups like students.

Ms. Sherman stated that this seems to be an issue of communication, and at what point do we ask how we communicate. She asked what the hard rules were because this group is interested in how we can communicate enthusiasm for the events that are allowed. She stated it’s hard to make sense of the process and asked about the $135 fee to read poetry.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer clarified that those fees are for businesses not individual artists. She stated that some places say they do poetry, for example, twice a year and we say it doesn’t make sense in the fee structure. Some businesses go through zoning and apply for everything under the sun and get approved, and then for licensing they ask only for the things that apply and take everything else off the application.

Ms. Sherman stated that this was an example of an expert user, and that most people like the artist community are not expert users who are not familiar with this. She stated that after talking to Ms. Murati-Ferrer it doesn’t seem as complicated but it’s still not as friendly as she can wrap her head around. She asked again about communication, and brought up an example of MIT bathroom stalls and how they have tree charts in “what if…?” scenarios outlining the consequences of decisions. She asked if we can have something like that in permitting which would be basically a tree chart with yes/no questions showing you to the next step and outcome. She asked for a more interactive interface and how permitting can communicate enthusiasm for events that are totally harmless but really benefit the vibrancy of the City while letting people know what permits they need.

Mr. De Celis stated that the overarching theme is who this is benefitting, and wanted to come back to best practices in other cities. He wanted to underscore and reference the readings that Councillor Mallon sent. He stated that Austin’s website is so welcoming in comparison to Cambridge’s, and that we’re all visual and performing artists or working with creative community. This population can all understand visually and performatively the difference between Cambridge’s link, which is beautiful and has lots of time and energy, compared with Austin’s link, which was a lot more engaging, much more user friendly, not as intimidating, and not just three categories mono-chromatically. He stated that the link featured news - it seemed live. giving schedule for events in city right on the bottom right. He brought up the visual of Austin City Stage. It listed upcoming street closures, checklist for event planning like tree chart, over to bottom right there was a schedule for all cool things coming up. He stated that you can see kindred spirits who are also hosting events. He stated that this group is here to encourage advocacy, kindred spirits, and community. He stated that he appreciated Geeta’s point about 501c3s. He stated that he was a data hound as an architect, and has to wear the hat of minutia and following the letter of the law, however he doesn’t want to lose sight of the fact that there’s got to be some way to differentiate between Harvard/MIT and the Dance Complex, or for that matter “friends of” organizations that are trying to raise some funds for kids to go to the Museum of Fine Arts, the Worcester Museum. He asked how can you even put them and MIT in the same category when it comes to permitting. He stated he understands legal department advice and we shouldn’t ignore it, but that we should keep talking about this.

Mr. Monestime stated that we needed to get there on small frequency items, and has personal experience from producing events as a one-off, and that something the City has as an asset is the special events committee. He stated that he would like to see this model for smaller events. He informed the group that if you want to hold a special event the City holds bi-monthly meetings with all stakeholders and listed City departments that were present. He stated that this is a resource for larger scale events where all your questions are answered at once, stakeholders tell you what to do and where to go. He cited Central Flea as an example and that he applies once for the season so that he’s in the system and can go from there. Peddlers change but this is a change the City handles well, and asked whether there could be a committee that helps navigate smaller events.

Ms. Peterson stated that the committee has their own website. She stated that it could be better and that she liked Austin’s website.

Mr. De Celis referenced the Public Art Commission.

Ms. Peterson stated that the committee more helps facilitate large events like River Festival.

Mr. Weeks stated that it’s where you go to make contacts with departments.

Ms. Peterson asked if there was a way to help smaller, nonprofit organizations and to balance that. She stated that noise is one of our biggest complaints in such a dense community even though one of the things we love is multi-use, like a restaurant on the first floor and housing above it. She stated that this is why we have licensing but it is a bureaucracy, and that serving food and alcohol is an even higher burden.

Mr. Weeks stated there is a difference in messaging, because the special events committee makes it clear that events are welcome and the City wants to support them, but that this is lost somewhere in the smaller, pop up events.

Mr. De Celis asked if we could be clear what messaged was.

Mr. Weeks clarified that he should’ve used the word communication.

Councillor Mallon stated that she thought the committee sent a positive message.

Mr. Weeks stated that the committee likes the spirit of the events, was welcoming, and that they wanted these events to happen in the City.

Ms. Sherman stated that sometimes when you look at the permitting list it’s intimidating Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that she was confused as to why people are coming back to the list, but had figured out why this is confusing and that she will change it tomorrow. She stated that the one day permit should be taken off this list and make sure it says it’s for annual only. She stated that one day should be removed from the table and will make sure that one day permits are clear on the fee schedule about what qualifies and what doesn’t. She stated that she never hears from artists, and artists don’t communicate with the commission, but that when we do she thinks the commission is helpful. She stated that clarifying the one day category is one of the ways we can look into making communication better.

Mr. Weeks asked about clarifying the schedule and that if he doesn’t see his event represented, do we have flexibility. He asked if these were state or municipal definitions.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer answered that they are state categories and that she is not inclined to add categories to license because that isn’t the message we want to send. She stated that under the law these are the categories that we have to license.

Ms. Latino stated that she agreed with Michael that larger events are easier and the answers are more robust and clear. She stated that very small events are more experimental and that lines get blurred. She wanted to get back to messaging in terms of tone, because it made her sad that the commission never heard from artists but she’s partially guilty. She stated that the Boston ordinance is so common sense and that events are quiet and don’t cause a lot of problems, and tat at blanket way to have them sends such a positive tone. She stated we want hardware stores that have big empty spaces to have poetry once a week, and that business owners are interested but don’t want to deal with the structure for a big event to put on a small event, and that there were perhaps more perceived hurdles than actual hurdles.

Mr. DiMuro stated that the Dance Complex talks about expanding into the streets because everyone should have dance in their lives. He stated that makers and producers can be allies to City Departments and that we put too much pressure on Jason and the Arts Council’s finite staff to do that. He likes the respect the Dance Complex has after 28 years and wants to contribute to the vitality and help other artists.

Ms. Latino states that we talk about the future and death of retail all the time, but that it’s an economic driver to put an acoustic musician in a store and drive people in. She stated that art for art’s sake is important but that you can use it to creatively activate retail.

Ms. Pradhan stated that the website’s messaging starts with problems we’re trying to deal with like noise or safety and asked if we could have an interface that starts with those concerns in the background. The front face should be what we want to encourage and happen. She stated that the application process is where we deal with what we want and don’t want going on. She used an example of the CCF redoing their grant process that started with applicants filling out whether they are a small or large organization and moved on appropriately from there. You don’t need to make a small organization jump through hoops to apply for a $5,000 grant, and asked if we could apply the same principle to arts permitting.

Councillor Mallon stated that Food for Free did the same thing in thinking about appropriateness for grants. Something like $5,000 should be simple vs. going for something bigger. She stated she heard good ideas about putting together a comprehensive website whether it lives in Licensing, Arts, or Economic Development.

Councillor Mallon stated that Mr. Monestime will talk about his role in the Central Square Business Association (CSBA), and the roles of business associations and how they’re beneficial.

She stated that artists don’t always consider themselves a business, and in addition to a permitting process that’s friendly and welcoming, asked if we want a person to help.

Mr. Monestime named all the business associations and referenced the Chamber of Commerce for larger entities, and Cambridge Local First for independent businesses. He stated that they interface with property owners, engage with businesses, and helped them understand the bureaucracy. He talks about interfacing a lot and the entry points that associations can help navigate, so that the journey doesn’t become the destination. He brought copies of CDD’s “Doing Business” booklet and read highlights.

Ms. Saffari mentioned that the booklet is available in six languages.

Mr. Monestime stated that there was a lot to navigate and that once you’re open there is a list of services that CDD offers so that you can become more knowledgeable, like workshops and grants.

He stated that people come to business associations because of the local factor and they want a way to connect to the community, network, and interact with other businesses. There is also marketing and promotional support such as newsletters that talk about events, artists. He stated that Cambridge does a lot around street performers and that the Arts Council now offers a calendar of events, festivals, and recurring programs. He suggested a one-stop-shop on the City side where artists can reach out if they have creative businesses and need help, maybe a hybrid of the Arts Council and CDD, and artists could go to either department. He would like a one-stop-shop similar to the special events committee.

Mr. Monestime gave the example of Revolutionary Clinics which is a medical marijuana dispensary. The property owner referred the business to the CSBA and abutters, and they had to go through zoning and special permits. They have different concerns than 1369, for example. He referenced an arts organization that’s trying to open in the Greek Political Club at 288 Green Street that’s having trouble opening because there’s no entry point and checklist with a list of supports. This is one case study where if the owner had more guidance from the start and permitting was a little more nimble, the owner could’ve been more proactive than reactionary.

Councillor Mallon thanked Mr. Monestime and stated this was a classic case of not having a single point of:: now, Central Square might lose something cool that could’ve been in the cultural district.

Mr. Mogassabi stated that we all have something to take back and participating in this is helpful.

There is room to improve the website not just with EDD but even the overall website could be more friendly. He stated that he is happy to take this dialogue to CDD that deal with zoning to make this more friendly, because he and Mr. Roberts are already working on how we can improve the zoning ordinance to make it more arts friendly.

Ms. Saffari added that her role is supposed to be the point of contact for individuals and business owners and she can talk with them if they don’t know where to go. The table of uses is a huge hindrance and they are working on zoning for small scale uses. Retailers should be able to have music and it’s helpful to hear needs.

Councillor Mallon stated that EDD provides specific workshops and asked if there could be an arts-focused one.

Ms. Saffari answered she’d be happy to explore that.

Mr. DiMuro stated that the arts community can be a resource for the City, and the City can help artists who are not civic-savy.

Mr. De Celis stated that the City has done a good job encouraging women and minority owned businesses and encouraged artists to step forward as well.

Mr. Pradhan said that residents don’t always see a distinction between departments, and that inter-agency coordination and behind the scenes could work better to make that obvious. There can be one virtual door that artists walk through to get connected to everyone and be directed to the right place.

Ms. Harrigan stated that the Mayor’s Office tends to be the actual door and that they get it all. Artists don’t come to them but they hear from Mr. Weeks. However, if you’re not connected you’re not being heard, and people don’t usually know the locations of things, they just walk in to the office and ask questions. Departments are confusing for people trying to navigate the system, and too many resources can actually be a burden. We need a one stop shop, but how do we get that out to the public? People need to know that there is a place they can go for help and everyone gets pointed in the same direction.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that for the record she hears from maybe 1-2 artists per year, and what she meant to say was that the bulk of licensing questions she deals with come from businesses and associations that call on their behalf, not an individual artist.

Ms. Shozawa stated that she agreed about the user friendly portal, integrated permitting, and having mechanics concealed behind the scenes. She thought of the coordinated pop ups that Lesley is part of and how their celebrity series street pianos were an easy permitting process. Cambridge Arts really made this seamless. She also thought about Parking Day which is a coordinated pop up and how well that is integrated.

Councillor Mallon said there was an overall tone of welcoming as a theme tonight.

Ms. Sherman thought about having an advocate and sensed Mr. Monestime’s role as being an advocate. She stated that she is not necessarily asking the system or messaging to change, but to have a liaison who is an insider and knows the system, like how both Mr. Weeks and Mr. Monestime are advocates. We need proactive messaging while respecting the role of the commission, which not to say hey let’s throw lots of parties but more to regulate activities and protect homeowners around businesses.

Mr. Weeks stated that he only has jurisdiction over street performers and not brick and mortar, but we do try to help map out ideas for placemaking and capacity building.

Mr. DiMuro stated that we have a police substation in Central Square, but can we have a facility for arts where people drop in? They come to the Dance Complex and ask questions, so sort of like a Lucy’s advice/psychiatric stand for artists.

Ms. Saffari stated that EDD has small business office hours to bring their department to businesses to answer questions and create a sense of listening and welcoming.

Councillor Mallon stated this goes back to the special events commission and how we can create an atmosphere where people can drop in and talk to a person.

Ms. Saffari referenced national small business week and hosting people with the licensing commission at the annex. They want to encourage artists to come and to hold these sessions more frequently.

Mr Monestime stated that he loved how Ms. Shozawa brought up parking day because it’s a great example of interdepartmental coordination. Each little spot is its own thing, and he asked if we could have more of that like small business week. It could be an inter-department thing where we focus on music pop ups, touch points like this throughout the year.

Ms. Gallop stated that they are spoiled at MIT because they have a whole department that just deals with their permit process, and that this conversation really helps her understand the things that individuals or small businesses need to interface with the City.

Councillor Mallon stated that it goes back to Ms. Pradhan’s tiered system for small organizations having a smaller fit, more personal, and heard a few things tonight as a central theme: a one-stop-shop where everyone can go that serves as a link between departments that’s also friendly.

She stated that she liked the tree idea. Also important to have a single point of contact/advocate/or liaison to sit at the Arts Council or EDD.

Ms. Murati-Ferrer stated that there should be a response to an acoustic ordinance soon.

Councillor Mallon stated that she wanted to push back on the 501c3 ruling and using the IRS to differentiating non-profits.

Mr. De Celis stated that he got involved with the Arts Commission through the schools and thinks a lot about actual vs. virtual space. He stated that he kept getting “no results” messages online when he searched for terms related to the arts and that we need to improve this. We’ve talked about how we can improve the actual built environment but we need to replicate that virtually.

Ms. Sherman observed that we don’t know how many people are going on the website and abandoning their applications, and at what step in the process they are doing so. She asked if we had a way to recognize this and follow up with people.

Ms. Latino stated that tone came up a lot and people want to do the right thing but get afraid. We need to take the fear out of licensing and talk to people face to face.

Councillor Mallon thanked Cambridge Community Foundation for hosting and having dinner.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:30.