Attractions at the Jan 8, 2007 City Council meeting:
Regardless what's on the agenda for this meeting, there's the matter of that 800 pound gorilla in the room, i.e. the arrogance of the current mayor and the silent complicity of his city council colleagues in Reeves' excessive travel expenses and his outrageous response to the completely reasonable request of two local newspapers (the Cambridge Chronicle and the Alewife) for some accounting of his expenses. In case you missed it, Reeves has apparently blown through $40,000 in travel expenses (double his annual travel budget) and has now said that he will only comply with Freedom of Information Act requests for information if he is personally paid $50/hour to delete items he feels should not be made publicly available. That's right - he wants to further enrich himself by being paid to deny access to information that should be a matter of public record. [Jan 8 update from the Cambridge Chronicle]
If Reeves' city council colleagues had any integrity, they would pass a Council Order requiring Reeves to divulge this information to the Council and to the public at no cost. Unfortunately, this is the “go along to get along” city council, so it is unlikely that they'll make any such request for information. It's conceivable that Councillor Kelley might file such an order, since he appears to have no fear of ending up on the losing end of an 8-1 vote. That would be a nice order to file - if only to see which of the city councillors have sufficient principles to vote for the order.
Reeves did have his bartender “educational liaison” John Clifford write a letter of pure, unadulterated BS to the Cambridge Chronicle in response to the paper's headline coverage of Reeves' scandalous behavior. It's been refreshing to see the response from Cambridge residents in the Chronicle and on their website as unanimously outraged by this arrogant mayor, except for one lone supportive blog entry - by someone who has long been associated with Reeves' political campaigns.
As far as Monday's meeting agenda is concerned, there's really nothing special. Of some potential interest, there are these items:
ORDER #1. That the City Manager is requested to look into the feasibility of Cambridge adopting a similar ordinance seeking LEED certification for large-building construction within its municipal zoning code. Councillor Murphy and Councillor Davis
This is a nice sentiment and it may be worth doing. I would hope that any architect or developer with any brains at all would be incorporating energy-saving designs and other environmentally responsible features into the buildings they propose to build. It's astounding to think that you would need an ordinance to make this so. Whether it's appropriate to require this particular (LEED) standard should be a matter of discussion in the Ordinance Committee.
ORDER #3. That the Council ask the National Institutes of Health to hold a community meeting in Cambridge to respond to residents’ concerns and answer their questions about the impact of the Boston University BioSafety Level 4 lab on their lives and to obtain their input into the required additional risk analyses. Councillor Simmons, Councillor Murphy, Councillor Davis, Councillor Kelley and Councillor Decker
I really have no idea whether this is a matter of actual concern or just a political football to be tossed around. I doubt whether the sponsors of this order have a grasp on what constitutes actual risk, but there has been some political organizing around this issue in Boston and nearby. The Order calls for a hearing to be held and for public response to be solicited. The underlying proposal that such a facility should only be built away from densely inhabited areas is really at the heart of this controversy.
ORDER #6. That the City Manager is requested to investigate a program where union workers working in Cambridge can have temporary parking permits while they work in the City and that the permit be specific to the neighborhood/community. Councillor Simmons
This is a rather ridiculous Order. Why should only union workers have this privilege? Does this imply that members of the Cambridge Teachers Union should be afforded this privilege? What about a substitute teacher? If a homeowner (like me) hires a man and his sons (none of whom are in a union) to work on his house, why shouldn't they also be afforded this same privilege? The City has a procedure for permitting vehicles necessary for a job to park in residential zones. You're probably familiar with the "No Parking - Tool Truck" signs that are posted for this purpose. If the City of Cambridge really believes its own PTDM Ordinance, then why should union members be exempt while others are not?
ORDER #13. That the City Manager is requested to recommend a process for a feasibility study for a Cambridge wind energy project. Councillor Davis
If only you could harness the hot air in the Sullivan Chamber .....
ORDER #14. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council at the Jan 22, 2007 meeting with the updated status on the Immigrants Rights and Citizenship Commission membership and the hiring of an Executive Director. Vice Mayor Toomey
More commissions? Yet another executive director with little to do? Why not start by decommissioning the Peace Commission and trading it in for this latest trendy commission charged with a task that can only be properly addressed at the federal level?
ORDER #15. That the Chair of the Public Safety Committee is requested to hold a public hearing regarding the public safety issues regarding the relocation of the Lechmere Station and the benefits of a Lechmere Square underpass. Vice Mayor Toomey
I actually found Councillor Toomey's proposal for a vehicular underpass rather appealing. However, now that I've looked over the proposed plans, I think they should just stick to their plans which will significantly calm the traffic on that stretch of the McGrath/O'Brien Highway and provide plenty of safe crossings for pedestrians. It will be a lot calmer and safer than Land Blvd. between the Galleria Mall and the Sonesta Hotel and nobody's proposing a tunnel there. - RW