2010
City Council Agenda Notes
2009
City Council Agenda Notes
2008 City Council Agenda Notes
2007 City Council Agenda Notes
2006 City Council Agenda Notes
City Council Committees for 2010-2011
(with links to reports)
updated July 30
Zoning Petitions
being considered or acted upon
by the Cambridge City Council
current as of June 22
City Council Committees 2008-2009
(with links to reports)
Final
City Council Scoreboard
The distribution of Orders and Resolutions by city councillors can provide
insight into how they approach their job and how they spend their time
and staff resources. (Orders with multiple sponsors count once in the
totals.)
P - Policy orders
I - Requests for information from the City
Manager and City departments
R - Rules and procedural items, such as the
scheduling of hearings
M - Maintenance orders: fixing things, putting
in stop signs, potholes, traffic, etc.
D - Death resolutions
C - Congratulations, get-well wishes,
birthdays, naming of street corners, etc.
A - Announcements of upcoming events, holidays,
proclamations, etc.
F - Foreign and national policy matters
Caveat: Merely filing a
City Council order does not mean that constructive results will follow.
The more successful initiatives are those accompanied by significant
amounts of staff time and effort by the city councillors. On the other
hand, some policy orders and requests for information can consume
enormous amounts of staff time. The mere filing of such an order can
thus be a counterproductive measure if the order is either frivolous or
has no hope of leading to a productive result.
|
Council Orders and Resolutions: 2010
through June 21
includes late orders of June 21
|
| |
P |
I |
R |
M |
D |
C |
A |
F |
| Cheung |
25 |
22 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
83 |
9 |
0 |
| Davis |
11 |
7 |
4 |
4 |
11 |
17 |
2 |
1 |
| Decker |
10 |
9 |
1 |
6 |
15 |
86 |
3 |
30 |
| Kelley |
2 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
| Maher |
8 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
45 |
132 |
9 |
0 |
| Reeves |
5 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
21 |
3 |
1 |
| Seidel |
9 |
20 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
12 |
1 |
0 |
| Simmons |
8 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
8 |
85 |
3 |
0 |
| Toomey |
10 |
7 |
2 |
8 |
73 |
45 |
1 |
0 |
| Total |
60 |
78 |
19 |
37 |
127 |
430 |
29 |
31 |
Number of Orders and Resolutions
2010 Total: 811
2009 Total: 1280
2008 Total: 1530
2007 Total: 2779
2006 Total: 2979
2005 Total: 3114
2004 Total: 2144
2003 Total: 2040
2002 Total: 1936
2001 Total: 2102
2000 Total: 2063
1999 Total: 1918
(some early figures approximate)
City Council Committee meetings
chaired and attended (2010-2011)
through reports of Aug 2, 2010 |
| Councillor |
Chaired |
Attended |
| Cheung |
3 |
20 |
| Seidel |
9 |
18 |
| Davis |
4 |
13 |
| Kelley |
0 |
11 |
| Toomey |
6 |
10 |
Maher
(Mayor) |
Mayor chairs all
Council and School
Committee meetings |
9 |
| Simmons |
2 |
8 |
| Reeves |
1 |
7 |
| Decker |
4 |
5 |
Number of City
Council committee
meetings held and reports filed:
2010-2011: 24
2008-2009: 113
2006-2007: 114
2004-2005: 148
2002-2003: 145
2000-2001: 153
City
Council Orders and Resolutions
Combined 2008-2009 Final Standings |
| 2008-2009 |
P |
I |
R |
M |
D |
C |
A |
F |
| Davis |
93 |
51 |
23 |
32 |
25 |
138 |
15 |
1 |
| Decker |
61 |
47 |
2 |
23 |
12 |
125 |
9 |
457 |
| Kelley |
27 |
72 |
18 |
22 |
1 |
16 |
6 |
1 |
| Maher |
25 |
19 |
10 |
18 |
158 |
76 |
3 |
0 |
| Murphy |
19 |
14 |
3 |
5 |
9 |
24 |
4 |
2 |
| Reeves |
10 |
11 |
4 |
8 |
27 |
73 |
9 |
2 |
| Seidel |
44 |
54 |
13 |
12 |
2 |
33 |
3 |
2 |
| Simmons |
66 |
22 |
20 |
33 |
46 |
425 |
35 |
5 |
| Toomey |
41 |
57 |
9 |
54 |
287 |
128 |
3 |
1 |
| Ward |
7 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
11 |
0 |
0 |
| Total |
294 |
304 |
77 |
175 |
473 |
939 |
82 |
466 |
City
Council Committee meetings
chaired and attended (2008-2009)
through reports of Mar 1, 2010
Final |
| Councillor |
Chaired |
Attended |
| Seidel |
22 |
75 |
| Davis |
20 |
65 |
| Kelley |
12 |
51 |
| Reeves |
17 |
47 |
| Maher |
31 |
44 |
Simmons
(Mayor) |
Mayor chairs all
Council and School
Committee meetings |
37 |
| Toomey |
4 |
34 |
| Murphy |
22 |
26 |
| Ward |
1 |
23 |
| Decker |
11 |
20 |
Council Orders and Resolutions
Combined 2006-2007 Final Standings |
| |
P |
I |
R |
M |
D |
C |
A |
F |
| Davis |
130
|
69 |
31 |
67 |
35 |
147 |
17 |
6 |
| Decker |
51 |
31 |
6 |
32 |
9 |
119 |
10 |
1570 |
| Galluccio |
58 |
55 |
6 |
35 |
341 |
151 |
3 |
3 |
| Kelley |
85 |
129 |
14 |
42 |
2 |
39 |
3 |
1 |
| Maher* |
4 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
16 |
8 |
0 |
0 |
| Murphy |
62 |
11 |
13 |
23 |
8 |
99 |
6 |
2 |
| Reeves |
39 |
10 |
6 |
17 |
66 |
446 |
80 |
2 |
| Simmons |
78 |
53 |
19 |
47 |
30 |
147 |
15 |
1 |
| Sullivan* |
90 |
69 |
24 |
113 |
763 |
550 |
68 |
4 |
| Toomey |
50 |
37 |
7 |
59 |
276 |
162 |
19 |
4 |
| Total |
412 |
364 |
96 |
343 |
1199 |
1566 |
197 |
1581 |
* Maher succeeded Sullivan on Sept 10, 2007
City Council Committee meetings
chaired and attended (2006-2007)
Final Standings |
| Councillor |
Chaired |
Attended |
| Davis |
16 |
73 |
| Sullivan |
36 |
61 |
| Kelley |
14 |
61 |
| Murphy |
26 |
50 |
| Simmons |
18 |
50 |
| Toomey |
13 |
40 |
| Decker |
20 |
34 |
| Galluccio |
7 |
33 |
Reeves
(Mayor) |
Mayor chairs all
Council and School
Committee meetings |
26 |
| Maher |
0 |
2 |
City Council Committees 2006-2007
(with links to reports)
Final - updated Mar 21, 2008
Scoreboards of Previous City Councils
City Council Rules
2010-2011
City Council Rules
2006-2007
[Rule 26 amended Feb 27, 2006]
City Council Goals - FY2010
(approved Feb 2, 2009)
City Council Goals - FY2008
(approved Dec 18, 2006)
FY2006 and FY2007
City Council Goals
| City Council agendas |
June 21, 2010 HTML PDF
June 14, 2010 HTML PDF
June 7, 2010 HTML PDF
May 24, 2010 HTML PDF
May 10, 2010 HTML PDF
May 3, 2010 HTML PDF
Apr 26, 2010 HTML PDF
Apr 12, 2010 HTML PDF
Apr 5, 2010 HTML PDF
Mar 22, 2010 HTML PDF
Mar 8, 2010 HTML PDF
Mar 1, 2010 HTML PDF
Feb 22, 2010 HTML PDF
Feb 8, 2010 HTML PDF
Feb 1, 2010 HTML PDF
Jan 25, 2010 HTML PDF
Jan 11, 2010 HTML PDF
Jan 4, 2010 HTML PDF
Dec 21, 2009 HTML PDF
Dec 14, 2009 HTML PDF
Dec 7, 2009 HTML PDF
Nov 23, 2009 HTML PDF
Nov 16, 2009 HTML PDF
Nov 2, 2009 HTML PDF
Oct 26, 2009 HTML PDF
Oct 19, 2009 HTML PDF
Oct 5, 2009 HTML PDF
Sept 21, 2009 HTML PDF
Sept 14, 2009 HTML PDF
July 27, 2009 HTML PDF
June 29, 2009 HTML PDF
June 22, 2009 HTML PDF
June 15, 2009 HTML PDF
June 8, 2009 HTML PDF
June 1, 2009 HTML PDF
May 18, 2009 HTML PDF
May 11, 2009 HTML PDF
Apr 27, 2009 HTML PDF
Apr 13, 2009 HTML PDF
Apr 6, 2009 HTML PDF
Mar 30, 2009 HTML PDF
Mar 23, 2009 HTML PDF
Mar 9, 2009 HTML PDF
Mar 2, 2009 HTML PDF
Feb 9, 2009 HTML PDF
Feb 2, 2009 HTML PDF
Jan 12, 2009 HTML PDF
Jan 5, 2009 HTML PDF
Index of City Council
meeting agendas
from 1998-2009 |
|
|
June 21, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
This will be the last City Council meeting before the summer recess. Monday
Night Live will return on Aug 2 (and then again on Sept 13)
unless some dire emergency occurs. The agenda is brief but does have
one contentious Order from Council Kelley (who seems to like
stirring controversy of late) challenging the preference given to
current residents applying for subsidized housing.
The zoning amendment relating to the Broad Institute's proposed
expansion in Kendall Square will also have to be passed to a 2nd
Reading in order to be voted at the Aug 2 (Midsummer) meeting, five
days prior to its expiration. In fact, this will make three zoning
petitions to be voted (or allowed to expire) at the Aug 2
meeting (including two passed to a 2nd Reading on June 14). Here are
some of the more noteworthy items on the June 21 agenda:
City
Manager's Agenda #7. Transmitting communication from Robert
W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Number 10-46,
requesting a report detailing issues of greatest importance that are
before the Police Review and Advisory Board (PRAB).
There's
nothing particularly revealing in this report, but in the context of
a former PRAB director's effort to milk the City in court plus the
Great Gatescapade last summer, anything even remotely related is
potentially a hot topic. Expect one or more councillors to use this
opportunity to branch out to several barely related matters before
they head off for their summer vacation.
City
Manager's Agenda #14. Transmitting communication from Robert
W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Number 10-76,
regarding current tree related ordinances, state statutes and
informal policies.
This is
referenced not because it's such an earth-shattering topic, but
rather to point out that trees and dogs are topics guaranteed to
bring out the passions in Cantabrigians. Parking is #3 on the list.
I suppose one could conclude from this prioritization that Cambridge
is a rather sleepy little village these days. Elsewhere they worry
about unemployment, violence, and substance abuse. In Cambridge we
lose our minds over dog parks, leaf blowers, tree removal, and
finding a parking space. Count your blessings, I suppose.
Resolution
#7. Congratulations to Susan Glazer on being appointed Acting
Assistant City Manager for Community Development. Mayor
Maher
This past
Wednesday was Beth Rubenstein's last day on the job as head of CDD.
It will be interesting to see how the focus of the department
evolves over the next few years - regardless who gets the job
permanently. The City rarely makes wholesale changes in any
department, and the Community Development Department is well-staffed
in such areas as housing (10 people), community planning (13
people), economic development (5 people), environmental and
transportation planning (9 people), plus several others - 44
full-time positions in the FY1022 Budget. Regardless what kinds of
policy Orders are passed by this or any previous City Council, there
is great inertia/momentum associated with such a significant
professional staff - many of whom have been there for some time -
and changes rarely happen overnight.
Order
#1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant
departments to change Cambridge's housing lottery system to
eliminate the residence preference. Councillor Kelley
This Order will die on an 8-1 vote. It's not even clear that Craig Kelley will
ultimately vote for his own Order. This does, however, bring
attention to some of the paradoxes inherent in several City
initiatives. For example, if you locate a wet shelter for active
alcoholics in Central Square, this will likely lead to an INCREASE
in the number of active alcoholics in the area (unless, of course,
every town were to build a wet shelter - which will not happen). If
you build it, they will come. Similarly, when Cambridge takes the
initiative to build "affordable housing," the number of
people seeking this housing in Cambridge will inevitably go up, not
down. One can speculate that the residential preference might cause
an increase in demand for this City-sponsored housing among existing
residents in excess of the rate at which new housing units can be
added to the supply.
If
Councillor Kelley is bothered by the preference given to current
residents in subsidized housing, perhaps he should also file an
Order regarding the numerous well-educated and able-bodied activists
who somehow manage to get subsidized housing in Cambridge. Why get a
job when it might jeopardize your cheap housing?
Order
#3. That the City Manager is requested to organize a forum
forecasting future housing needs for older Cantabrigians that
incorporates a panel of housing experts. Vice Mayor
Davis, Mayor Maher and Councillor Simmons
This is a
worthwhile goal, but would this be additional subsidized housing on
top of existing programs, or should there be a shift in existing
resources toward elderly people who might really need the housing in
resource-rich Cambridge?
Order
#2. Cancellation of the June 28, 2010 City Council meeting.
Vice Mayor Davis
Rarely
does a City Council Order get unanimous sponsorship prior to the
meeting. This one did! Early summer vacation! Please note that of
the 17 City Council committees, 8 of
them have yet to meet and only 1 of these 8 has any meetings
scheduled.
Order
#11. That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to
identify areas in need of additional bike racks and the feasibility
of installing long term "bike sheds" or "bike
lockers" for storage of commuter bikes near metro stations.
Councillor Cheung
The City
can start by clearing out the many bicycles that have been locked
and not touched for months in Central Square. That would free up
quite a few locations for locking up a bike. Let's hope the City
doesn't start cracking down on the harmless practice of locking
bikes to parking meters. Rarely does this cause any obstruction or
inconvenience and it greatly increases the available lockups in
business districts. -- Robert Winters
Comments? |
|
June
14, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
Tonight's
agenda is dominated by the disposition of several zoning-related
matters. There's also a potential time-sink in Councillor Cheung's
Order regarding the legislation recently passed by the Massachusetts
House regarding illegal immigration. The Order does not just
"disapprove" of the legislation, it "condemns"
it. Here's what we have, starting with the proposed amendment
regarding conversion of buildings from Institutional to Residential
use (which was initiated by the advertised sale of buildings by the
Jesuits and the questionable suggestion by Councillor Toomey that
these should be purchased in order to densely pack subsidized
housing units onto the sites - Mar 22 Order
#1, Apr 5 Mgr #11):
City
Manager's Agenda #6. Transmitting communication from
Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board
recommendation on the City Council Rezoning Petition to Modify
Section 5.28.2 Related to Buildings Occupied by Institutional
Uses. [The Planning Board does not recommend adoption of
the Petition as filed.]
Committee
Report #1. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam
Seidel and Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Jr., Co-Chairs of the
Ordinance Committee, for a meeting held on May 6, 2010 to consider
a proposed amendment to Section 5.28.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to
expand the applicability of Section 5.28 to structures that may
have been built for residential use but have been in Institutional
(religious, educational, governmental) use for at least ten years.
Committee
Report #2. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Timothy
J. Toomey, Jr., Co-Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a meeting
held on June 9, 2010 to continue discussion of a proposed
amendment to Section 5.28.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to expand the
applicability of section 5.28 Conversation of Non Residential
Structures to Residential Use to include structures that may have
been built for residential use but have been in Institutional Use
for at least ten years.
There
were significant issues raised at the committee hearings about this
proposal and the Planning Board gave the idea a "thumbs
down." This proposal was primarily a reaction to the apparent
sale of these buildings to Harvard University. The spirit of the
proposal was similar to the rhetoric that accompanied the allocation
of CPA funds toward historic preservation at Shady Hill Square, i.e.
the insincere statement that subsidized housing should be built in
the tonier parts of town as an act of class warfare against a
perceived elite. There are also elements of resentment growing from
the frequent siting of such projects in places like North and East
Cambridge. In any case, zoning amendments should ideally not be
proposed just because you're pissed off.
Committee
Report #3. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Timothy
J. Toomey, Co-Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a hearing held
on June 9, 2010 to continue discussion of a petition by the City
Council to amend the Zoning Ordinance in accord with the
recommendations of the Green Building Task Force to encourage
energy efficient buildings.
With
a positive Planning Report and now an Ordinance Committee Report,
this will presumably be passed to a 2nd Reading and ordained later
this month. The zoning change would only affect new construction and
large scale renovations.
Charter
Right #2. Charter Right exercised by Mayor Maher on Order
Number Six of June 7, 2010 requesting the City Manager to
confer with the Community Development Department and Boston
Properties to report back to the Ordinance Committee of the City
Council on June 9th, 2010, on whether the ground floor retail
proposed by Boston Properties would be of the size and nature
suitable for a grocery store, convenience store, or small
foodstuffs boutique.
This
matter was hotly debated at the previous meeting. There are numerous
issues at play such as whether the proposal would effectively kill
the possibility of new housing in the Kendall Square MXD district.
Councillor Cheung's Order #6 from last week
was actually far more comprehensive than I had originally noticed
and included a provision for what was arguably commercial rent
control for "upstart local entrepreneurs". Another
significant issue was whether there was any guarantee of the
long-term tenancy of the Broad Institute at this site, a new local
institution with "favored nation" status. As is often the
case, allegations
of quid-pro-quo political contributions by the developer/owner
have been made but not substantiated.
Order
#1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the
appropriate department heads and report back to the University
Relations Committee the feasibility of the City creating a
"Welcoming Packet" for new students, distributed by the
universities with information on public services, Cambridge
history and culture, and a calendar of civic events.
Councillor Cheung
This
brings back recollections of a similar Order in 2000 from former
Councillor Jim Braude calling for a "welcome wagon" for
new residents. (Order #6, April 24, 2000). Here's an summary
of the ensuing conversation a decade ago.
Order
#2. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the
appropriate department heads on the feasibility of instituting a
five cent per disposable bag fee, collected by the City that would
in turn be put aside into a fund which purpose is to buy canvas
bags wholesale and distribute them to Cambridge residents.
Councillor Cheung
Nanny
government. Reusable canvas (or any other material) shopping bags
are what everyone should use, but they're plentiful and cheap and
already distributed at all sorts of events. Cambridge residents
don't need to be taxed or subsidized for such trivialities,
especially when they are already so freely available.
Order
#3. Opposition to the amendment that was passed to the
budget bill regarding immigrants. Councillor Cheung
It's
interesting that the primary point made in opposition to this state
legislation is that it is unnecessary because it adds little more
than what is already required of those seeking to take advantage of
taxpayer-funded services. Is so, why the strong condemnation? It's
worth noting that Councillor Cheung's Order focuses on all the
contributions of immigrants to this country, but the proposed
legislation is not about immigrants. It's about illegal
immigrants, i.e. those who are residing in Massachusetts but have
not adhered to existing laws. Councillor Cheung's Order also
correctly challenges the practice of creating policy through budget
amendments, but the federal government does this routinely. The
Order correctly points out that there may be substantial costs
associated with enforcing the proposed legislation. In any case, be
it Arizona or Cambridge, it's ridiculous that the inability of the
U.S. Congress to address these matters causes individual states to
take such actions. Regardless of party affiliation, spines appear
not to be part of anatomy of U.S. Congressmen and Senators. - Robert
Winters
Comments? |
|
June 7, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
It's
primarily routine stuff this week, though I suppose we could be
treated to another "International Night" as part of
Councillor Decker's El Salvador Order #8.
Meanwhile, back in Cambridge, we have the following, starting with
two Planning Board reports on pending zoning amendments:
City
Manager's Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W.
Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on
the green building zoning petition. [The Planning Board recommends
adoption of the petition as proposed.]
This
matter will presumably be passed to a 2nd Reading with expected
ordination later this month. Not quite ready for ordination (and
still in committee) is the zoning petition affecting a portion of
Kendall Square. An interesting aspect of this is the never-ending
effort to reinvent Kendall Square in the wake of unenlightened urban
planning/renewal that depopulated the area. The petition primarily
sets out to permit the Broad Institute to build another life science
building instead of the housing previously permitted by the Planning
Board. The height limit of the district is 230 feet - the highest in
Cambridge.
The
Committee Report indicates the City Council's desire to repopulate
the area, i.e. build housing in addition to tax-generating
commercial buildings, yet no direction is provided. A proposed Order
in the report asks the Community Development Department to identify
housing sites in the MXD district, yet it seems likely that housing
may never be built in this district. If it were to be built,
Councillor Kelley wants to ban future residents from owning cars.
Why stop there? Why not go for broke and dictate their diets as
well? Sometimes it seems as though Cambridge elected officials will
never be satisfied until they can control everything right down to
the jokes you're permitted to laugh at.
City
Manager's Agenda #20. Transmitting communication from Robert W.
Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on
the Boston Properties Petition to amend the MXD District. [The
Planning Board "enthusiastically" supports this zoning
change which would facilitate the Broad Institute’s interest in
expanding near its headquarters in Cambridge.]
Committee
Report #2. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel
and Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Jr., Co-Chairs of the Ordinance
Committee, for a meeting held on May 11, 2010 to consider proposed
amendments to the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance in Article 14
Mixed Use Development Cambridge Center to create a "Smart
Growth Underutilized Area" in the vicinity of Broadway, Main
and Ames Streets and the site of the West parking garage on Ames
Street.
Order
#6. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the
Community Development Department and Boston Properties to report
back to the Ordinance Committee of the City Council on June 9th,
2010, on whether the ground floor retail proposed by Boston
Properties would be of the size and nature suitable for a grocery
store, convenience store, or small foodstuffs boutique.
Councillor Cheung
Councillor
Cheung's Order is well-intentioned, but it seems like the most that
will come out of it would be a convenience store for the IPad crowd.
Let's not forget that there used to be an actual neighborhood in
Kendall Square, including a school (and I don't mean MIT).

City
Manager's Agenda #16. Transmitting communication from Robert
W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the acceptance and approval of
the layout of portions of certain street in the North Point area of
Cambridge.
It
will be interesting to see how North
Point actually develops after the recession passes and the Green
Line is relocated and extended. In spite of the seemingly nice
landscaping, most plans I've seen suggest a sterile, isolated
environment. The best thing, in my opinion, would be to create
direct roadway connections through North Point to East Somerville,
the Inner Basin area, and Charlestown, but the isolationist planners
would never permit such a thing. It might cause people to actually
cut through this new North Point neighborhood en route to other
places - like almost all other non-gated neighborhoods.
Resolution
#14. Best wishes to the Cambridge Consumers’ Council on their
upcoming event to recognize Shredding Day and declare July 31, 2010
as "Shredding Day in the City of Cambridge."
Mayor Maher
The
full text of City Council Orders is provided, but not so for
resolutions. It makes you wonder what exactly Shredding
Day is. Then again, we just celebrated Laser Day on
May 16 as a result of a recent resolution from Councillor Cheung.
Resolution
#24. Congratulations to Beth Rubenstein on her new position as
Director of Campus Planning and Development at the University of
Massachusetts at Lowell and thank her for her thirteen years to the
City of Cambridge. Mayor Maher, Councillor Decker
This
came as a bit of a surprise. Best wishes to Beth as she heads off to
her next challenge. This is reminiscent of when Kathy
Spiegelman made a similar move from the Community Development
Department to Harvard University. Between these two heads of CDD,
there was Michael Rosenberg (with whom I biked the route of the old
Middlesex Canal last fall) and Susan Schlesinger (who still serves
on the City's Affordable Housing Trust Board and the Community
Preservation Act Committee). It will be interesting to see who
succeeds Beth Rubenstein as head of the the Community Development
Department - a position of considerable influence in determining the
City's prioritization of commercial development, housing, open
space, transportation, and more.
Order
#1. That the City Manager is requested to investigate
establishing a Cambridge Carbon Offset Fund to receive contributions
that may be used for the purpose of reducing Cambridge greenhouse
gas emissions, including the possibility of using these funds for
building retrofits, planting trees, or other relevant activities.
Vice Mayor Davis
I'm
only barely beginning to understand things like "cap and
trade" and a possible "carbon tax" on
businesses/industries, but if it's appropriate to view such things
as a kind of currency, then maybe it's not such a good idea to
create local currency. Things could get complicated enough if and
when the U.S. Congress gets around to enacting something. As a side
note, I recently attended a meeting organized by GreenPort of a
panel of experts discussing various aspects of some proposed
regulations growing out of concerns about climate change. It was
interesting to see what are essentially capitalist solutions being
presented to an audience that included some Marxist-leaning
Cambridge activists who might well prefer to just nationalize every
industry or regulate them into oblivion.
Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to provide an update
on the City’s tree inventory and establishment of a
"volunteer corps" of citizens interested in helping
maintain and update the City’s tree inventory.
Councillor Seidel
It's
a great idea to try to marshal volunteer labor to help the City in a
number of areas. However, it is easy to imagine a situation where
activists of one sort or another would use the opportunity to create
conflict rather than cooperation. If that potential problem can be
ironed out, there would be great benefit in having an unpaid army of
residents acting cooperatively with City workers for the benefit of
all.
Order
#12. That the City Manager is requested to provide an update
as to the status of the tents currently set up in Flagstaff Park,
including the number of such structures allowed on the site, who is
residing in them, and the length of time these structures are
allowed to remain on the site. Councillor Seidel
The
phrasing of this Order is curious. It asks about the number of
structures allowed on the site and related matters, but one would
surmise that the answer to that question is zero. The real issue is
whether the City will ever take action to clear out the site - not
the identity of its squatters or their residential tenure at that
location. -- Robert Winters
Comments? |
|
May 24, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
Tonight
is Budget Adoption Night at City Hall. The related Finance Committee
reports are these:
Committee
Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez,
Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C.
Decker, Chair of the Finance Committee, for public hearings held on
May 5, 2010, May 13, 2010 and May 19, 2010 relative to the General
Fund Budget for the City of Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2011 and
recommending adoption of the budget in the amount of $426,629,125.
Committee
Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez,
Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C.
Decker, Chair of the Finance Committee, for a public hearing held on
May 13, 2010 relative to the Water Fund Budget for the City of
Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2011 and recommending adoption of the
budget in the amount of $16,416,120.
Committee
Report #3. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez,
Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C.
Decker, Chair of the Finance Committee, for a public hearing held on
May 13, 2010 relative to the Public Investment Fund for the City of
Cambridge for Fiscal Year 2011 and recommending adoption of the
budget in the amount of $9,935,015.
Committee
Report #4. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez,
Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Marjorie C.
Decker, Chair of the Finance Committee, for a meeting held on May
12, 2010 for the purpose of providing a summary to community leaders
of the city’s current and proposed budget and an explanation of
how state and federal budget cuts have impacted the city’s budget.
This
year's budget hearings were not controversial except perhaps for the
School Department budget which eliminates several clerical
positions. That matter still lies "On the Table" though
apparently some resolution must be in the works as indicated by the
lack of rancor reported at the May 19 School Department budget
hearing. Perhaps some contractual guarantees prevailed or maybe
positions elsewhere in Cambridge government were found in response
to lobbying by city councillors and school committee members.
City
Manager's Agenda #3. Transmitting communication from Robert W.
Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 10-64,
regarding the sale of the Sullivan Courthouse. ["In light of
the courthouse’s great size (460,000 square feet), lack of parking
associated with the building, and its out-of-date architectural
style, I do not see any public reuse for the structure." ...
"Should the property be sold to and redeveloped by a private
entity local zoning would apply. We have expressed our willingness
to work closely with any owner to develop a project of more moderate
height and scale; with active ground floor uses; including some
portion of residential use, in keeping with the neighborhood
context; and with appropriate parking supply based on building
uses."]
The
referenced courthouse building really is out of place and out of
time - the product of a misplaced sense of progress decades ago. A
modest-scale private mixed residential/commercial/office
redevelopment is probably the best reuse for the site. Any proposals
that have been floated for a public marketplace in the Lechmere area
should happen in and around the existing commercial corridors along
Cambridge Street and the O'Brien Highway (the former Bridge Street).
There must surely also be a way to integrate the court functions
that were previously in the Sullivan Courthouse into existing and
new buildings adjacent to the historic court buildings in the
Lechmere area.
City
Manager's Agenda #19. Transmitting communication from Robert W.
Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 10-77,
regarding a report on a review of investments and business practices
engaged in by the City to determine what activities are conducted
with the State of Arizona. ["Following a review of the City’s
current listing of CD’s purchased through Morgan Stanley, it was
determined that a $100,000 CD was purchased on Apr 9, 2009 from the
Asian Bank located in Phoenix, Arizona. The CD has a maturity date
of July 9, 2010, and will not be renewed after reaching maturity.
Our representative at Morgan Stanley has been instructed to refrain
from purchasing any further investments in the State of
Arizona."]
Not unexpectedly, the City's Arizona investments amounted to pocket
change. The City Council has (thankfully) not yet voted on a
meaningless policy position on the recent Arizona law regarding
suspected illegal immigrants.
Resolution #22. Happy Birthday wishes to a special Cantabrigian.
Councillor Simmons, Councillor Cheung, Councillor
Decker, Councillor Kelley, Mayor Maher, Councillor Reeves,
Councillor Seidel and Councillor Toomey
Hmmm.....
Henrietta Davis had a birthday on May 18 and she's the only city
councillor not listed as a sponsor. Could she be that "special
Cantabrigian?" Had this been Councillor Reeves' birthday, he
would have been the lead sponsor.
Resolution
#36. Congratulations to Littane Bien-Aime on being selected a
2010 Charles B. Rangel International Affairs Fellow following a
nationwide contest. Councillor Cheung
We hope that the Rangel
award is not in recognition of ethical violations such as using
political connections to evade New York City housing laws or
accepting corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean.
Order
#7. That the City Council Committee on Transportation, Traffic
and Parking schedule a public meeting on the City’s traffic
calming and bike facility programs. Councillor Kelley
It's likely nothing will come of this, but Councillor Kelley is to be
commended for directing some attention toward the generally
unquestioned and arbitrary decisions of City transportation
planners.
Order
#9. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the
City Council on the property known as the Norton Woods that has been
reopened after being closed due to flooding with a newly instituted
no dogs policy. Councillor Decker
The bottom line is that this area is not public property and the owners
(American Academy of Arts and Sciences) can institute any rules they
wish. They've been great in allowing public access to the property
and though it may be worth politely asking a question or two about
their policy on dogs, ultimately it's their call.
Order #10. That the City Manager is requested to inform the City
Council on how the Cambridge Historical Commission, the Cambridge
Room of the Cambridge Public Library, the Cambridge Historical
Society, and Cambridge Community Television might work together to
digitize the various Cambridge historical collections and determine
how these various entities will work together to preserve Cambridge
history of the past, current happenings, social history,
architectural history and preservation, and other matters of
historical significance to Cambridge. Councillor Reeves
This is a timely and useful Order from Councillor Reeves. Though it's
unclear why CCTV is included in the mix, the fact is that we now
have a proper Cambridge Room at the new Main Library and there's a
clear need to preserve and archive material and to make much of it
digitally available. A professional archivist was reportedly to be
hired, but it's not clear from the FY2011 budget whether this has
actually taken place or what the job responsibilities would be for
this person and for others already working in the Historical
Commission who might play a role in such a project. This is an area
where volunteer assistance and a cooperative arrangement with the
Cambridge Historical Society (which is already engaged in digital
archiving) may be worth considering.
Order #11. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the
City Council with a delineation of the boundaries of Joan Lorentz
Park. Councillor Seidel
Normally this might be just a formality, but with the new Library,
reconstruction at the high school, and pedestrian connections being
reconfigured around these tightly integrated uses, it's worth
clarifying who's responsible for maintaining which pieces of this
jigsaw puzzle. In some respects, everything outside of the buildings
has the feel of a single contiguous park, but clarity today may be
helpful 20 or 30 years from now should there be future plans to
reconfigure the space.
Committee Report #6. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel
and Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance
Committee, for a hearing held on May 6, 2010 to consider a petition
filed by the City Council on behalf of the Green Building/Zoning
Task Force to amend the zoning ordinance to encourage green building
practices in Cambridge.
Normally, a committee report like this doesn't really stand out, but there is
one notable record of public testimony in the report worth
highlighting:
Guy Asaph, 29 Oakdale Street, said there is no reason for anyone to
invest $30,000 in a solar system. A $25,000 investment would produce
$25 in electricity. There is no incentive. He said that if we want
to make energy issues seriously, there have to be real incentives.
The proposals are nice, but they do not go far enough. The greenest
buildings are big buildings, so up-zoning and providing incentives
are the best ways to make Cambridge buildings more energy efficient.
Though the units of measurement are clearly misstated here (an investment of
$25,000 is a one-time cost, but it's unclear whether the $25 in
electricity is per month, per year, or over the useful life of the
investment), it is useful to be clear about whether there is much
bang for the buck in some proposed energy projects like solar panels
and wind turbines. I have heard credible testimony suggesting that
the payback for energy generation projects like these are very
minimal in a Cambridge context, while energy conservation measures
(such as insulation and higher efficiency) usually have clear
economic and environmental benefits. Where should the investment
money be concentrated? Insulation and efficiency seem to be the
smart choices much more than on-site power generation. Cambridge is
not the same as Hull or Oklahoma ("where the wind comes
sweeping down the plain").
Mr. Aseph doesn't stop at questioning the economics of solar installations. He
also makes the case for packing more and more higher density
buildings into the City. Considering the fact that he develops real
estate for a living, this is a rather self-serving vision (to say
the least) even if there may be a grain of truth in his wish to
upzone the city ever higher. -- Robert
Winters
Comments? |
|
May 10, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
The City Manager's Agenda tonight features significant public investment
items - primarily authorizations to borrow for infrastructure
projects. Here's the list:
Mgr #8. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $5,250,000 to
continue sewer projects in the Harvard Square, Cambridgeport, and
Alewife Watershed areas of the City.
Mgr #9. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $700,000 to
provide funds to replace the existing artificial turf on the soccer
field at Danehy Park as well as resurfacing the 400 meter running
track.
Mgr #10. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,000,000 to
provide funds to fund the reconstruction of JFK Street between Eliot
and Brattle Streets.
Mgr #11. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,500,000 to
provide funds to fund the first phase of the reconstruction of the
Harvard Square Tunnel (Cambridge Street Underpass).
Mgr #12. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $500,000 to
provide funds to fund the design of the restoration of the Kendall
Square area on Main Street between Broadway and Ames Street.
Mgr #13. Appropriation and authorization to borrow $1,500,000 to
provide funds for improvements to several City buildings including
the East Cambridge and Inman Square Fire Stations, Ryan Garage at
Public Works, Central Square Library, and several elementary
schools.
There should be "suitably engrossed" awards in gilded folders
given to city councillors who generate excessive numbers of suitably
engrossed resolutions at (I believe) around $5 a pop. This week's
runner-up award goes to Mayor Maher for his 11 identical resolutions
to various people for "passing the Massachusetts Department of
Public Health written and performance test for the position of
Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)." The top prize this week
goes to Councillor Simmons for her 51 (I'm not kidding) nearly
identical resolutions to people for their "work on the Prince
Hall Memorial Committee." Good thing she has that aide to help
with such important "research" matters like this. By the
way, did I mention that the single biggest jump in department
budget over a five year span was for the City Council. So many
resolutions, so little time.
Councillor Decker has another Vanity Order this week:
Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to determine with due
consideration for, among other things, return on investment, to what
extent it is reasonable to not participate in any business
activities substantially connected with the State of Arizona,
municipalities in Arizona, and other business entities in Arizona or
conducting substantial business in Arizona. Councillor
Decker
Regardless of the merits of the Arizona law, it's arrogant for an elected
official in the northeast to weigh in on matters in a border state
whose issues she can't even begin to appreciate. Besides, it's hard
to imagine the City of Cambridge having any investments in Arizona,
so this really is just a Vanity Order.
Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the
appropriate department heads and commission heads to develop a
standard set of resources, facility privileges, tools, and barebones
operating budget the unfunded commissions may use in their work of
enacting Council policy. Councillor Cheung
Essentially
all Cambridge citizen boards and commissions work closely with one
or more City departments which provide support for these boards.
Councillor Cheung's Order focuses primarily on "the capability
for all commissions to post and maintain an email distribution
list" and seems to suggest that the capacity for this should be
made available on City servers rather than via such services as
YahooGroups and GoogleGroups. This does raise the inevitable issue
of public records. Clearly, if City servers are involved then any
and all communications are potentially available as public records.
It's not clear if this is the case for communications among members
on outside servers. Another consideration is that with an outside
service the group "owner" can freely moderate the group
and even delete some communications. This probably would not be
permitted if hosted on City servers as it may constitute
"destroying a public record." Perhaps things are better
left as they are.
Order
#13. That the City Manager is requested to update the City
Council on the impact of the MWRA water pipe rupture on the Charles
River in Cambridge. Councillor Seidel
Actually, Councillor Seidel's Order asks about two incidents: the recent MWRA
break in Weston and a February 2010 diesel spill in the Lower
Charles River Basin. While I cannot speak to the latter, I can say
with some confidence that the Weston break had no impact whatsoever
on Cambridge other than to highlight the great advantage of having
our own independent water supply. As it turns out, I was leading a
group of 40 hikers that day (May 1) along a section of the Sudbury
Aqueduct in Wellesley and telling the history of Boston
Water and about how this aqueduct was last used about 35 years ago
and was still maintained for use in a "catastrophic
emergency". Little did I know that such an emergency was
unfolding even as I spoke and that by day's end the Sudbury Aqueduct
would be back in service during the emergency. -- Robert
Winters
Comments? |
|
May 3, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
The City Manager will
give an overview of the FY2011 City Budget early in tonight's
meeting followed by the usual platitudes from councillors. The
Budget Hearings start this Wednesday (see schedule below). Word is
going around that hordes of townies will be at tonight's meeting for
Councillor Toomey's tabled Order from the previous meeting. [That
the City Manager is requested to restore funding for School
Department clerical positions until a proper and negotiated process
can be achieved with the Cambridge School Department and Unions
representing the employees, and to report back to the City Council
on the progress.] School Committee members have commented that these
changes occurred only after appropriate process and that these staff
reductions are consistent with a long-held commitment to cut back on
excesses in central administration within the School Department. It
would seem that some of these jobs may have their roots in political
friendship. More significant is the question of whether it is
appropriate for the Cambridge City Council to intervene in personnel
issues within the School Department and under the supervision of
that other elected body - the Cambridge School Committee.
There are also these
other items of minor interest:
Order
#2. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the appropriate department heads on the feasibility of offering closed
captioning for streaming video on the City's website.
Councillor Cheung and Councillor Decker
Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the
appropriate department heads on the feasibility of updating the City
of Cambridge's website with automatic translation software.
Councillor Cheung
Very well to make this
information accessible to all, but it does raise the issue of
diminishing returns. How much additional investment and staff
support will it take to provide these marginal benefits?
Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to investigate the
possibility of making the property at 93 Kirkland Street part of
Cambridge's affordable housing stock through purchase and renovation
by the City or by a qualified non-profit. Councillor
Seidel
Once again, the knee-jerk response is that taxpayer money should be spent without question on
"affordable housing" projects. Maybe it's a good idea, but
taxpayers should really question where their money is going.
Communications
and Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received
from Mayor David P. Maher, transmitting changes in the membership of
the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee. [Councillor
Decker has been removed from this committee, per her request.
Councillor Simmons has been appointed to this committee. The
committee now consists of Councillors Seidel (Chair), Cheung, and
Simmons.]
The entertaining thing
about this communication is that Councillor Decker wishes to cut
down on her committees because of "the breadth of work I expect
to be engaged in as Chair of the Housing, Health, and Finance
Committee." Suffice to say that Councillor Decker's record of
attendance at Council committees has been at or near the bottom for
as long as she's been on the City Council. It will be interesting to
see the "breadth of work" of which she speaks. She will
now serve on just 6 committees while all of her Council colleagues
will serve on 8, 9 or 10 committees. -- Robert
Winters
Comments? |
|
April 26, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
Tonight's the night when the voluminous annual Budget Book arrives on the
desks of each city councillor. This marks the official start of
"Budget Season" at City Hall where councillors often use
the opportunity of the Budget Hearings to grill City department
heads on operational details of their departments whether or not
they are related to their budgets. The bottom line (literally) is
that this year's total recommended FY2011 operating budget is $443,288,905
plus $16,416,120 for the Water Fund plus the capital budget of
$9,935,015. The previous FY2010 recommended operating budget was
$426,226,960 plus $17,985,890 for the Water Fund plus the capital
budget of $29,360,780.
The comparison by general categories from last year to this year is as
follows:
| Category |
FY2010 Budget |
FY2011 Budget |
1 yr % Change |
5 yr % change |
| General Government |
$45,627,180 |
$47,778,775 |
4.7 |
23.4 |
| Public Safety |
$97,169,260 |
$101,163,395 |
4.1 |
24.1 |
| Community Maintenance & Development |
$79,033,800 |
$82,475,075 |
4.4 |
40.3 |
| Human Resource/Development |
$28,232,600 |
$261,519,545 |
4.6 |
30.2 |
| Education |
$133,563,880 |
$137,492,275 |
2.9 |
10.8 |
| Intergovernmental |
$42,600,240 |
$44,277,085 |
3.9 |
15.9 |
| Grand Total |
$426,226,960 |
$443,288,905 |
4.0 |
22.1 |
| Water Fund |
$17,985,890 |
$16,416,120 |
-8.7 |
-4.0 |
| Capital Budget |
$29,360,780 |
$9,935,015 |
-66.2 |
10.2 |
There are
some notable differences in specific departments and assessments as
well.
| Department |
FY2010 Budget |
FY2011 Budget |
1 yr %
Change |
5 yr %
change |
| Executive |
$1,841,390 |
$1,980,195 |
7.5 |
34.7 |
| City Council |
$1,461,370 |
$1,518,725 |
3.9 |
49.2 |
| Election |
$799,490 |
$897,050 |
12.2 |
22.4 |
| License |
$830,755 |
$830,755 |
8.7 |
22.0 |
| Emergency Management |
$156,230 |
$0 |
-100.0 |
-100.0 |
| Peace Commission |
$111,745 |
$116,580 |
4.3 |
46.7 |
| Library |
$7,450,945 |
$8,135,070 |
9.2 |
43.7 |
| Human Rights Commission |
$210,355 |
$190,005 |
-9.7 |
14.3 |
| MWRA Assessment |
$21,333,055 |
$21,617,305 |
1.3 |
35.2 |
| Cherry Sheet Assessments |
$15,267,185 |
$16,659,780 |
9.1 |
4.4 |
Note, in particular, that the single biggest jump in department budget
over a five year span was for the City Council itself. You can
download the 5-year summary spreadsheet here: http://rwinters.com/docs/bottomlineFY2011.xls.
Elsewhere on the Agenda, there are these items worthy of comment:
Resolution
#28. Congratulations to a special person. Councillor
Toomey, Councillor Decker, Vice Mayor Davis, Mayor Maher, Councillor
Seidel
Resolution
#50. Resolution honoring a great supporter of the Portuguese
community. Councillor Toomey
The whole idea of a public meeting seems to suggest that the identity of this
"special person" and this "great supporter"
should be made known. The City Council is a publicly elected body,
not a private social club.
Order #11. That the City Manager is requested to confer with
appropriate departments to determine whether the city can submit a
proposal for use on the Sullivan Courthouse and to report back to
the City Council. Councillor Toomey
It's a long stretch to imagine the City making use of a building of this
size, especially in light of the considerable abatement costs that
would likely be associated with any renovation and reuse of the
building. It also seems doubtful that Councillor Toomey would be
advocating packing another major "affordable housing"
development into East Cambridge in light of his recent
Order.
Order #14. That the City Manager is requested to restore funding
for School Department clerical positions until a proper and
negotiated process can be achieved with the Cambridge School
Department and Unions representing the employees, and to report back
to the City Council on the progress. Councillor Toomey
There was a day when the School Committee concerned itself with matters such
as this. Is it really proper for the Cambridge City Council to
direct the City Manager to restore funding for positions under the
jurisdiction of the Superintendent of Schools who is hired by the
duly-elected Cambridge School Committee? Question this matter during
the School Department Budget hearing if you must, but doesn't this
just stink of micromanagement - and not even by the proper elected
body? -- Robert Winters
Comments? |
|
April 12, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
The agenda is relatively light but the tension should be palpable on the eve of
the Special State Senate Primary. As a courtesy, if there is still
such a thing in the Cambridge political world, this meeting should
open and shut in a half hour so that candidate Denise Simmons can
attend to her campaign. Therefore I expect we'll see Councillor
Reeves, Craig Kelley, and former and future Senate candidate
Marjorie Decker engage in extensive questions and comments just to
extend the meeting for hours. Councillor Simmons should just check
in and check out or exercise her Charter Right liberally at the
first hint of nonsense.
[Postscript (8:25pm) - The predictions
turned out all wrong - it was Simmons supporter Councillor Davis who
spoke and lengthened the meeting the most. Marjorie Decker was
concise and to the point. So much for fanciful predictions.]
On the agenda, we have the following items of interest:
City
Manager's Agenda #4. Transmitting communication from Robert
W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number
10-52, regarding a report on the possibility of structuring the
parking ticket system in a way that would increase parking tickets
as people stay longer at expired meters or general no-parking spots.
Short answer - this is prohibited under state law: "all such fines
shall be uniform for the same offense committed in the same zone or
district". One wonders how this applies to Somerville's
posted practice of permitting residents to park for free for several
hours at parking meters in some areas at the edge of commercial
zones. It's a good idea, but is it legal under state law?
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to make City staff
available to the Economic Development Committee to look at current
real and personal property taxation issues which affect
entrepreneurial businesses within the city. Councillor
Cheung
Councillor Cheung is diving right in as the new Chair of the Council's Economic
Development Committee. The key phrase in the Order is: "That
staff review and report back to the Economic Development Committee
of the City Council on state taxation guidelines and statutes that
could potentially be adopted or changed to impact new business
development, including but not limited to the taxation of R&D
related personal property, economic distress regulations, and real
estate related tax increment financing, for the purpose of encourage
new business growth and job creation." Councillor Cheung may
soon discover how restricted City officials are in matters such as
real estate taxation. Good ideas surfaced several years ago when
multi-family residential property taxes were escalating with
condominium real estate taxes relatively flat, but it went nowhere
without changes in state law.
Order #2. That the City Council reappoint D. Margaret Drury as
City Clerk for a term beginning June 1, 2010 and ending May 31,
2013. Mayor Maher
Order #3. That the City Council reappoint James Monagle as City
Auditor for a term beginning June 1, 2010 and ending May 31, 2013.
Mayor Maher
The City Council has authority under the Plan E Charter to appoint only the
City Manager, the City Clerk, and the City Auditor. Tonight they'll
extend the appointments of two of these. Though not specified in the
Charter, the City Council also formally appoints the Deputy City
Clerk and, whether official or not, they now get to
"appoint" their own patronage personal assistants, almost
all of whom are City-funded campaign workers. On a brighter note,
both City Clerk Margaret Drury and Auditor Jim Monagle are well
deserving of reappointment.
Order #4. That the City Council place a temporary moratorium on
designating any location under its control as "in
memoriam" until such time as naming criteria are developed by
the Government Operations Committee and adopted by the City Council.
Mayor Maher
If passed, this represents a victory of sorts for Councillor Kelley who has
played like a broken record on this issue. Annoyance aside, the
substance of his argument is correct. This practice has been too
long abused.
Order #5. That the City Council go on record urging Cambridge's
Delegation to the Great and General Court to support Section 25, the
Municipal Early Retirement Incentive Program, contained in the
HB4526. Mayor Maher
The key phrase in the Order is: "This program would allow a limited
number of long term employees to receive early retirement benefits,
while restricting the City's ability to refill those same positions
to no more than 30%, 45% and 60% of the former total salaries over
the next three years, respectively." Seems like a good option
in tight financial times. - Robert
Winters
Comments? |
|
April 5, 2010 City Council Agenda Highlights
The City Council returns tonight with a very full agenda. For starters, the
City Manager provides 15 responses out of 25 pending City Council
requests for information - a nice spring cleaning. These reports
cover such topics as traffic, Google, the census, airplane noise,
Lechmere, a proposed zoning amendment, Central Square, affordable
housing, web video on the City website, bedbugs, telephone books as
free speech, and weatherization. The Manager also reports that the
new Election Commission Executive Director will be Tanya Ford who
comes to us from Bethpage, Long Island. There's still no word on the
pending appointment for one of the Democrat seats on the Election
Commission, but Alexandra Detjens has been appointed to the Police
Review & Advisory Board. Recommendations from the Green
Building/Zoning Task Force round out a very full agenda from the
Manager.
Regarding the Council's Agenda, there are these two related items:
Reconsideration #1. Councillor Kelley filed reconsideration on the adoption of
Order Number Eight of Mar 22, 2010 as amended to place on the table
and refer to the Government Operations and Rules Committee the
proposal to amend the City Council rules to replace the Health and
Environment Committee with two committees, the Community Health
Committee and the Sustainable Environment Committee.
Committee Report #1. A communication was received from D. Margaret
Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Sam Seidel
and Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Co-Chairs of the Government
Operations and Rules Committee, for a meeting held on Mar 25, 2010
for the purpose of discussing dividing the Health and Environment
Committee into two committees, one to focus on health issues and the
other on environmental and sustainability issues.
Though really just a formality, the discussion of this modification to the
City Council committees degenerated into accusations of political
shenanigans at the previous meeting. The apparent cause of this
kerfuffle seems to be that Mr. Reeves is peeved at not being
appointed Chair of the Economic Development Committee (Councillor
Cheung got that honor) and this led to some "acting out"
over this apparently unrelated modification. In truth, the split
into the Community Health Committee and the Environment Committee
makes sense and all of the councillors seem to acknowledge this.
Councillor Kelley still seems to think that all the committee need
to be "rejiggered", but this point of view does not extend
beyond him.
The previous City Council meeting on March 22 ended with 8 Orders made
subject to the Charter Right and carried over to the April 5
meeting. These include:
Charter Right #1. Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey on Order
Number Twelve of Mar 22, 2010 requesting the City Manager to
direct the new Executive Director of the Police Review Advisory
Board to submit a report to the City Council detailing what are
perceived to be the issues of greatest importance that the Police
Review Advisory Board must focus on, and that this report should be
submitted to the City Council no later than 90 days from the
adoption of this order.
This was an Order from Councillor Simmons that seems directed at the
relevance and purpose of the PRAB in the wake of its relative
irrelevance in last summer's "Great Gatescapade". Together
with this week's Order #6 calling for an Executive Session on the
still-unresolved Monteiro case, the appointment of a 5th member to
the PRAB, and some dissatisfaction with the Gatescapade-inspired
Review Committee, there seems to be more than enough kindling to
start a political fire.
Charter Right #5. Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey on Order
Number Seventeen of Mar 22, 2010 requesting the City Manager to
report back to the City Council on the feasibility of adopting a
Pay-As-You-Throw program in Cambridge.
See comments from the last meeting. Basically, this is a good idea for
promoting recycling and waste reduction in many communities, but any
additional benefits may be limited in a city like Cambridge which is
already doing reasonably well in these areas compared to many other
cities and which may do better if the next contract includes
single-stream collection and processing of recyclable materials.
Charter Right #6. Charter Right exercised by Councillor Toomey on Order
Number Eighteen of Mar 22, 2010 requesting the City Manager to
direct the City Solicitor to report back to the City Council with
options for amending the city ordinance to allow for the Manager to
permit civic organizations to use public space after hours.
This was introduced in advance of a planned sleep-out on the Cambridge Common
a week ago. They came, they slept, and they marched the following
day without incident. It seems unnecessary to change an ordinance
when a little discretion in enforcement seems more than adequate.
Applications & Petitions #7. A zoning petition has been received from
Boston Properties, requesting that City Council amend the Zoning
Ordinance and Map relating to the Mixed Use Development District
Section 14.32.1 and 14.32.2 located between Main Street and
Broadway.
It's unclear what this zoning amendment is really about except that it
emphasizes the definition of a "Smart Growth/Underutilized
Area" in the heart of Kendall Square. One can't help but think
this means that Boston Properties wants to more intensely develop
within this area. Let's hope the councillors do their homework and
ask the appropriate questions when this goes to the Ordinance
Committee.
The City Council Orders include a few potentially controversial or otherwise
interesting items. For example:
Order #5. That this City Council go on record requesting that Harvard
and MIT cease further layoffs and any cuts in hours, salary or
benefits and engage in an open and transparent dialogue with all
stakeholders including staff and the community.
Councillor Decker and Councillor Cheung
The impact of such an City Council Order is likely zero. It would be nice if
the sponsors would provide tangible evidence that these personnel
decisions of the universities are being made for any reason other
than economic necessity.
Order #6. That the Mayor be and hereby is requested to convene the
City Council in Executive Session with relevant City and support
staff at the earliest opportunity to discuss ongoing litigation, to
include the Monteiro and Idenix cases. Councillor Kelley
It's certainly good for the City Council to get periodic updates
regarding ongoing litigation, but it's never clear whether
Councillor Kelley's motivation is illumination or just acting out.
In any case, I'm always interested in whether Ms. Monteiro will
ultimately prevail in "milking Mother Cambridge" or
whether the taxpayers will be relieved of this burden. Too bad the
Executive Session is closed to the public.
Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the
City Council on the possibility of structuring the City's parking
ticket system in a way that would increase parking tickets as people
stayed longer at expired meters or general no-parking spots.
Councillor Kelley
Order #10. That the City Council's committee on Transportation,
Traffic and Parking be and hereby is requested to hold the
appropriate hearings to determine if the price for a residential
sticker in Cambridge is appropriately set and if visitor passes are
appropriately priced and available. Councillor Kelley
Order #11. That the City Council's committee on Transportation,
Traffic and Parking be and hereby is requested to hold the
appropriate hearings to determine if the amount of parking required
for multi-unit residential units is appropriate.
Councillor Kelley
It's hard to say whether Councillor Kelley is morphing into chief fundraiser
for the Traffic Department or just committing political suicide by
leading the charge toward higher prices for residential parking
permits. Few would argue that the $8 annual charge is excessive and
most would be happy to pay somewhat more, yet it seems unwise for an
elected official to agitate for an increase rather than merely
accede to such a proposal from the City Manager. That said, if the
Cambridge Climate Congress had its way, I suppose we'd all be in
ZipCars or paying $1000 per year for resident stickers for an
vanishing-by-design supply of on-street parking spaces.
Order #13. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the
City Council on the City's policy towards on-street public spaces
being used by workers of large construction projects and what impact
the workers' "feeding" relevant meters has on the City's
ticketing efforts. Councillor Kelley
Here's another radical proposal that I hope a councillor considers for
introduction: Let's have the Traffic Department review areas with
metered parking in mixed residential/commercial zones to determine
when it would be appropriate to – a) allow resident parking
without a fee at metered spots during morning hours; and b)
eliminating the fee during hours when there is little or no demand.
For example, on Broadway (near my house), the greatest demand for
metered spots is by people going to the City Hall Annex. That
building is closed after noon on Fridays and on Saturdays, so why
are all the meters in effect when there is essentially no demand
other than among area residents?
Order #14. That the City Council is requested to discuss additional
use of the Sullivan Chamber by the School Committee in the immediate
future and come to a formal decision on whether to support this
additional use or not at the next City Council meeting.
Councillor Kelley
This is apparently related to an effort by School Committee member Patty
Nolan and others to ensure continued School Committee access to the
Sullivan Chamber during construction at the high school. The issue
seems to be potential conflict with City Council committee meetings,
yet the evidence shows there to be little or no conflict.
Order #15. That the City Manager is requested to provide an update to
the City Council on the status of Vail Court and any activities
related to the property. Councillor Seidel
This is noteworthy only as evidence of an era now passed. It was not so long
ago that hordes of Eviction Free Zone protesters would descend on
City Hall over real or perceived violations against tenants at Vail
Court on Bishop Allen Drive. That parcel now consists primarily of
boarded-up buildings and may as well have sagebrush blowing through
it. Where have all the activists gone - long time passing?
Order #16. That the Council supports adoption of a regulation by the
License Commission to prohibit licensed hotels from subcontracting
housekeeping services such as guestroom service.
Councillor Decker, Councillor Cheung, Mayor Maher,
Councillor Toomey and Councillor Reeves
There are more than a few questions of obstruction of commerce in this Order.
The fact that a license is required to run a hotel does not give
license to elected officials or City administration to micromanage
these businesses. What's next? Should the fact that a driver's
license is required to operate a motor vehicle allow the government
to dictate where someone can drive for shopping or recreation?
Order #19. That the City Manager is requested to confer with
appropriate departments and community agencies and report back to
the City Council detailing the processes and procedures by which the
City plans for, selects, and enacts its affordable housing
commitment. Councillor Cheung and Councillor Toomey
This Order is potentially the most controversial item on the entire evening's
agenda in that it questions the "logic and process of site
selection for affordable housing." The Order requests a report
on how these projects are distributed throughout the city, suggests
that there be more balance in how and where projects are sited, and
asks what future plans the City and its related agencies may have
for "affordable housing" in Cambridge. Good questions all.
-- Robert Winters
Comments |
Research
Assistants? I don't think so...
May 2, 2006 – The Cambridge City Council voted 8-1 on May 1 in favor of
giving themselves personal “research assistants.” Only Councillor
Craig Kelley had the fortitude to raise any questions about the proposal.
So it appears the proposal will sail through the Budget Hearings with
barely a raised eyebrow. While I have raised the issue of the genesis of
this proposal, the question of its merits and its implementation have not
been addressed here. So, here are some observations, questions, and
suggestions for our elected officials, City administration, and residents
to consider:
1. There was a time when our elected officials enlisted citizens to assist
them in research matters relating to public policy. Cambridge is perhaps
the best city in the United States in which to find experts in almost any
matter that the City Council (or School Committee) may need to better
understand. There is a wealth of evidence over the last 65 years showing
how citizens have worked with elected officials in the development of
public policy. If the City Council feels burdened by the research needs of
its committees, there is an enormous pool of talent available at no cost.
Currently, the City Council makes very little use of this very available
resource.
2. There was a time when councillors collaborated much more than they
currently do in committee work and in the development of policies. A
well-functioning City Council committee should delegate responsibilities
so that each member masters certain facets of the tasks at hand and shares
this knowledge with the rest of the committee. In effect, councillors
serve as staff to each other. I would argue that it is better that elected
officials educate themselves.
3. Are these jobs going to be publicly posted with a job description? Who
will be doing the actual hiring? If Councillor Smith wants to hire Mr.
Jones as personal staff, will the mayor have veto power over the hire?
Does the Personnel Department have a role to play here or are these to be
political hires? None of these details have been discussed publicly and
they are important.
4. If these “research assistants” are to be hired, there should be
policies and safeguards to ensure that they are not working on behalf of
any councillor's political campaign. Otherwise, this proposal will have
the effect of using taxpayer dollars to support the political campaigns of
incumbent councillors. In fact, maybe it's time to consider a similar
disqualification for staff in the Mayor's Office. A founding principle of
Plan E government is the elimination of political patronage in favor of
responsible, professional government. Some of us still believe in this
ideal. At the very least, strong guidelines should be established for what
is and is not permissible.
5. The existence of this proposal within the budget of the Mayor's Office is
very strange indeed since it involves personnel for councillors, not the
mayor. Should we not infer from this that the consensus of the councillors
is that the City Council staff is not up to the task? If the job of
councillor has changed so much, should there not be some discussion of
revamping the Office of the City Council to better match the needs of the
councillors? Why are these tasks being outsourced?
6. Some councillors have recently stated that the filing of City Council
orders requesting information through the City Manager is not enough and
that councillors would be better served by having their own staff to get
this information. This strikes me as contrary to the intent of the Plan E
Charter which dictates that all matters involving City personnel be
directed through the Manager. One can easily imagine a scenario where each
councillor has his or her personal staff contact City department heads for
information rather than filing an Order as a body to get a common
response. If the consensus is that the City Manager is being obstructive
or extraordinarily slow in responding, shouldn't the City Council take
more forceful action in holding the Manager accountable?
7. If the term “research assistant” is meant to be factual, then perhaps
these RAs should be topic-specific so that we can have people who have
some background or aptitude for the tasks at hand. If, for example,
research in energy-related matters is what is needed, then someone with
that knowledge would be ideal. Is any such protocol being discussed to
ensure that the councillors and the taxpayers will get the best quality
research for their tax dollars? I would hope that matters like scheduling
and event planning will be handled by the City Council Office rather than
by “research assistants.”
8. Several councillors have complained that e-mail has had a dramatic effect
on the responsibilities of a city councillor due to the time consumption
associated with responding to these messages. I don't doubt this. However,
there are efficiencies that can make such tasks much easier. For example,
if each councillor receives 100 e-mail messages on a particular topic,
then rather than making 100 shallow replies, I would advise responding to
ALL of the issues of substance raised by residents in a single,
comprehensive message sent (using blind-carbon-copy) to all of the people
who sent messages. Those of us in academics have been doing this for
years. It's much more effective to craft comprehensive messages sent to
the whole class rather than many nearly identical messages sent to
individual students. There are MANY ways to be more effective in e-mail
communication. Then again, if individual responses are seen as more
valuable in securing potential votes in the next election, that's a choice
each councillor must make on his or her own - independent of
taxpayer-supported staff.
In summary, I am not questioning whether or not some changes in staffing are
warranted. I am, however, asking that any such changes be done in the best
interest of taxpayers and that City funds are never used to either
directly or indirectly support the reelection efforts of elected
officials. - RW, May 3, 2006
Punching Out Your Cake and Having it Too – a chronology of the proposal for
personal Council staff
(posted April 28, 2006)
Jan 1998 - The vote for who was to be mayor went on for several weeks as
Ken Reeves held out until there were 4 other votes for Katherine
Triantafillou, an outcome sincerely supported by at most two councillors
(Reeves and Triantafillou). The would-be mayor rounded up her supporters
for the coronation. A congratulatory cake was ordered. As the vote
occurred and there were momentarily 5 votes on the table for Triantafillou
(Born, Davis, Duehay, Reeves, Triantafillou), Councillors Galluccio and
Russell changed their votes to Duehay. Councillors Born, Davis, and Duehay
then changed their votes to Duehay and Mayor Duehay was elected.
Councillor Galluccio was then elected vice-mayor. Meanwhile, in the room
next to the Council chamber, Alice Wolf aide and Triantafillou supporter
Marjorie Decker exploded in anger and punched out the cake, police were
called, and a grudge began that remains to this day.
Feb 1998 - Mayor Duehay made good on the deal by hiring Galluccio campaign
worker Terry Smith to work in the Mayor's Office "to assist the mayor
and vice mayor". This marked the first time (to my knowledge) that
any councillor other than the mayor received personal staff (except for a
brief experiment with interns some years earlier). Resentment grew among
other councillors about the special treatment one councillor received in
exchange for delivering the mayor's job.
1999 - Frank Duehay and Sheila Russell announced they would not seek
reelection. Jim Braude, David Maher, and Marjorie Decker were subsequently
elected to the City Council as incumbent Katherine Triantafillou was
defeated, principally as a result of Marjorie Decker winning her seat.
2000 - After 1˝ months without electing a mayor, Anthony Galluccio was able to
secure 6 votes to become mayor (Braude, Davis, Galluccio, Maher, Sullivan,
Toomey). David Maher was elected vice-mayor. Terry Smith became chief of
staff of the Mayor's Office. David Maher did not request any personal
staff. Kathy Born suggested during the Budget hearings that the idea of
personal staff for councillors be referred to the Government Operations
Committee. Ken Reeves said at this time, "I don't believe the
vice-mayor needs the extra staffing and not us." Note that this was a
reference to the previous administration (Duehay-Galluccio).
Around this time, the Government Operations Committee met to discuss the proposal
for personal staff. The estimates given for City Council staff were: (1)
$390,250 for a low-level, bare bones proposal; (2) $157,450 for 8
part-time staff with no benefits; (3) $72,300 for one legislative research
assistant. Deputy City Manager Rich Rossi said personal staff was tried
briefly about 10 years earlier with interns. Michael Sullivan voiced
concern about keeping in touch personally with his constituents and
wondered how he would find enough things for this person to do. Most of
the councillors spoke in support of giving themselves personal staff.
Kathy Born said that if she found her job to be too much, she could hire
her own staff person, only she would have to pay for it out of after-tax
money, unlike an employee of a business. She suggested higher Council pay
with the option of paying for a staff person out of this additional pay.
The option would remain for a councillor to act as a “full-time
councillor” without staff. Jim Braude said that a councillor could lend
his or her campaign the money for the staff person.
One week later, the City Manager proposed a 23% pay raise for city councillors
and a change in the ordinance to allow for automatic increases so that
they would never again have to vote to raise their own pay. The pay raise
was approved and the question of personal staff disappeared for the rest
of the Council term.
2001 - Kathy Born and Jim Braude chose not to seek reelection. Brian Murphy and
Denise Simmons were elected to the City Council.
2002 - Michael Sullivan was elected mayor on Inauguration Day. Henrietta Davis
was elected vice-mayor. Unlike the previous term, Henrietta Davis did
request and receive personal staff as vice-mayor when Garrett Simonsen,
Davis' election campaign manager, was hired to the Mayor's Office staff as
her assistant. Indications are that he served more than just the
vice-mayor.
2004 - Michael Sullivan was again elected mayor, only this time Marjorie Decker
was elected vice-mayor. Garrett Simonsen became chief of staff of the
Mayor's Office. Sullivan hired Kristin Franks (who had been Decker's
campaign manager) as “assistant to the mayor and vice-mayor” but the
indications were that she was working almost exclusively for Decker. By
summer, Franks was gone and Nicole Bukowski, another Decker campaign
worker, was hired as exclusive staff to Decker. For the remainder of the
Council term, Bukowski waited hand and foot on Decker - and resentment
among other councillors grew for the remainder of the Council term.
Late 2005 - Craig Kelley was elected to the City Council and incumbent
David Maher was defeated. Speculation immediately began about who would be
the next mayor. Some councillors reported that a plan was being discussed
to give certain councillors personal staff as part of the vote-trading for
electing the mayor.
Early 2006 - Ken Reeves was elected mayor and Tim Toomey vice-mayor. In a
surprising turn of events, Bukowski continued to serve out of the Mayor's
Office as personal staff to Councillor Decker - clearly a part of the deal
to make Reeves mayor. Rumors circulated that there was a plan to assign
some councillors additional committee chairs as justification for getting
personal staff. When the committee chairs were announced, Councillor
Decker (who, along with Councillor Galluccio, has maintained the worst
record of committee attendance during her time on the Council) was
surprisingly given four committees to chair. In contrast, Henrietta Davis
(who has always been at or near the top in committee attendance) was given
only one. This was seen by some as a way to justify Decker keeping her
personal aide in exchange for her vote for mayor.
April 2006 - Ken Reeves submitted a budget for the Mayor's Office that is
54.3% higher than the previous year. The cause for the increase is a
proposal for personal staff for all the remaining councillors at a
recurring annual cost of about a quarter-million dollars. There was no
public indication of any kind that such an extravagant plan was in the
works. An order is on the May 1 City Council agenda (after the budget was
already submitted on April 24 including the increase) formally calling for
the major staff increase. The order is co-sponsored by Reeves, Toomey,
Decker, Galluccio, Sullivan, and Davis. It is expected that, like every
person hired to date as staff for the vice-mayor (and most of those on the
mayor's staff), all of the new “research assistants” will be
affiliated with the election campaigns of the officials they will serve.
Curiously, these patronage hires will be occurring at a time when there
are fewer major issues before the Council and when an unprecedented number
of councillors are either serving in other elected positions or seeking
election to other positions now or in the near future. - RW, April 28,
2006
April 27, 2006 Cambridge Chronicle story on the Council staff proposal
April 27, 2006 Cambridge Chronicle story on the submitted FY07 Budget |