This is the last regular meeting before the Council's summer hiatus. The Nine will next meet at the August 7 Midsummer meeting. Here are some of the more significant items on tap this week:
CITY MANAGER’S AGENDA
4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on the Woodford, et al Zoning Petition to amend the zoning map of the City of Cambridge in the area of Concord Avenue bounded by Concord Avenue, New Street, Fern Street, and Field Street and including properties on Bay State Road, from Residence C-1A, Residence B and Industry A-1 to Residence C.
Excerpt: “The Planning Board does not recommend adoption of the Petition. The Board finds that the proposed zoning change does not meet the objectives of the current ordinance provisions (to encourage housing over time in the area while allowing existing and new businesses to operate unencumbered), nor would it be an effective way to address the issues raised by the petitioners (adequate transition between the existing neighborhood and new development, improved pedestrian safety, retention of existing businesses).”
12. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Marsha Weinerman as the Executive Director of the Cambridge Election Commission effective July 1, 2006.
Ms. Weinerman is succeeding Teresa Neighbor who has served for many years. Here's Ms. Weinerman's resume. Having worked in various capacities with Cambridge elections for over a decade, it's very important to me personally that the Elections Department function well and that the municipal elections, especially, are promoted and conducted as well as possible.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk transmitting a report from Councillor Brian Murphy and Councillor Michael A. Sullivan, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance Committee, for a meeting held on April 26, 2006 for the purpose of considering a petition to rezone the Concord/Alewife area, which was re-filed by the City Council. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after May 29, 2006. Petition expires July 25, 2006.
A vote is expected at this meeting on the Concord/Alewife zoning petition. The City Council meeting will be preceded by a 4:00pm Ordinance Committee meeting to work out any late details. If the vote does not happen on Monday, a Special City Council meeting will be held on Wed, June 28 on this one topic. If you'd like to read the committee reports on this matter, here they are:
June 22, 2005 July 18, 2005 Nov 22, 2005 Apr 26, 2006 May 17, 2006 June 13, 2006 June 14, 2006
7. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk transmitting a report from Councillor Brian Murphy and Councillor Michael A. Sullivan, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance Committee, for a meeting held on May 31, 2006 for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the text of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge in Article 20.80 - Memorial Drive Overlay District by inserting the following sentence at the end of paragraph c. of Section 20.810: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, for purposes of computing lot area per dwelling unit, the provisions of Article 5.14 shall not apply." The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after June 26, 2006. Petition expires August 29, 2006.
This is a relatively straightforward petition, so there's a chance they'll take care of it at this meeting rather than at the Midsummer meeting in August, the only other time it can be voted.
8. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk transmitting a report from Councillor Brian Murphy and Councillor Michael A. Sullivan, Co-Chairs of the Ordinance Committee, for a meeting held on May 17, 2006 for the purpose of considering a petition filed by Eileen Woodford et al. to amend the zoning map in the area of Concord Avenue bounded by New Street, Fern Street, Field Street and properties along Bay State Road to change the present zoning of Residence C-1A and B and Industry A-1 to Residence C. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after July 3, 2006. Petition expires August 15, 2006.
As with the previous item, this will have to be voted tonight or at the Midsummer meeting. The other options are to let it expire or re-file it. The Planning Board has recommended against this petition (see above), but there are political ramifications to the vote. It's possible that a councillor might move the petition in order to get all the councillors on record for or against it (which would preclude re-filing the petition for two years).
RESOLUTIONS
11. Congratulations to City Manager Robert W. Healy on the occasion on his 25th Anniversary as City Manager of the City of Cambridge on July 1, 2006. Mayor Reeves
This one needs no explanation. Congratulations, Bob.
This is the first meeting in ages which has no resolutions from Ms. Decker on U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq. This is probably due to Ms. Decker's absence at the last meeting and her filing no new orders or resolutions in her absence. The Iraq resolutions may appear as late resolutions. For the record, since I've received hateful glares from Ms. Decker for not standing in rapt and respectful attention while she reads these resolutions, let me explain why I object to her actions.
It is perfectly reasonable to submit resolutions or make statements opposing the Bush administration's Iraq adventure, though I see little value in doing so at a meeting of the Cambridge City Council. I do, in fact, share the anti-war sentiment. It is also perfectly reasonable to submit (and read) resolutions on soldiers killed in Iraq and naming those soldiers. Again, I see little value in doing so at a meeting of the Cambridge City Council.
What I do find objectionable is the merging of a statement opposing the war with the naming of U.S. soldiers killed in that war without permission of the families of these soldiers. It is very likely that most of these families feel that their sons and daughters died heroically for a worthy cause and that their deaths had some meaning. It is also very likely that many of these families would not approve of these names being used as part of anyone's statement opposing U.S. involvement in Iraq. In fact, because I post the Council agendas, I have been contacted on several occasions by family members asking why these names are on the agenda.
In short, file your resolutions and make your statements, if you must. But don't merge the two unless you've received the permission of the families. Get it? It's your statement, but it's their names.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
7. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk transmitting a report from Councillor Michael A. Sullivan and Vice Mayor Timothy J. Toomey, Jr., Co-Chairs of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, for a meeting held on June 6, 2006 to discuss the schedule and process for the City Council to set goals for FY 08-09. [Read the report. It's interesting.]
I highlight this one mainly to point out that the Council goes through this exercise about every two years. It's a facilitated process usually led by a consultant named Roberta Miller. The purpose of the exercise is to produce set of mutual goals for the City Council and the City Manager (and thus the City government). The goals are very broad and don't really change that much, but that could be related to the fact that the process that produces the goals doesn't change all that much.
Choosing goals, much like choosing a representative body in an election, can be greatly affected by the election method. Winner-take-all plurality elections in separate districts will produce a different result than at-large elections with proportional representation. Similarly, if you ask 9 councillors to name their "greatest hits" of current goals and distill the combined responses to a set of mutual goals, the process of gathering and distillation of these responses will greatly affect the results. Important priorities may be overlooked, and specific goals may be emphasized more than they should. Election methods matter! There is also a telephone survey of residents proposed as part of the goal-setting process. As with any statistical survey, the statistics can easily be spun to favor certain outcomes. Significant bias is typical in any sampling design that uses voluntary response, and nonresponse or neutral response is often misinterpreted in surveys.
Complicating the process this year is Councillor Decker's desire to choose the facilitator. The report also highlights the problem of an excess of Council orders for information that require significant City staff time. The committee report is worth reading. With a little reading between the lines, you can get a sense of the growing conflict between some Council members and problems in the relationship between the elected councillors and the City administration. -- RW