Tom Lehrer, Musical Satirist With a Dark Streak, Dies at 97 (NY Times)

A mathematician by training, he acquired a devoted following with songs that set sardonic lyrics to music that was often maddeningly cheerful.

July 27 – Tom Lehrer, the Harvard-trained mathematician whose wickedly iconoclastic songs made him a favorite satirist in the 1950s and ’60s on college campuses and in all the Greenwich Villages of the country, died on Saturday at his home in Cambridge, Mass. He was 97.

Note: I learned about Tom Lehrer’s death today at the Cambridge Jazz Festival from a neighbor of Tom. He was found dead in his home on Saturday but may have died several days earlier as a result of an accidental fall in his Sparks Street home.

Note 2: This week while walking on Broadway I saw a box of refrigerator magnets of the chemical elements. Later in the day I found them all scattered along Broadway and have been picking them up over the last few days. Perhaps this was a foreshadowing of the passing of Tom Lehrer.

William Bruce “Bill” King (1932 - 2025)

KING, William Bruce “Bill” — Lawyer; Civic Leader; Beloved Father, Grandfather, and Friend William Bruce “Bill” King, of Cambridge, Needham, and Phillipston, MA, passed away on July 22, 2025, at age 93, after a brief illness. Beloved and respected by all who knew him, Bill charmed family, friends, and colleagues with bonhomie, long stories, good humor, curiosity, and keen intelligence. He was dedicated to his family, to the law firm where he spent his entire professional career, and to civic engagement in every community he joined.

Bill was born on June 3, 1932, the third of four sons of Gilbert and Frances (Hood) King of Chestnut Hill, MA. He graduated from Phillips Exeter Academy (1950) and Harvard College (1954), before serving two years as an officer in the Navy at the end of the Korean conflict, followed by ten years of reserve duty. Returning to Cambridge after active service, Bill graduated from Harvard Law School in 1959 and started a 40-year career at Boston law firm Goodwin Procter.

On a blind date in the spring of his freshman year at Harvard, Bill met Radcliffe classmate, Sheila Malone, who became the love of his life and, in July 1955, his wife. They enjoyed 65 years of marriage until Sheila passed away in 2020. Surviving him are their three children, Stephen King (Mindy Aldridge) of Bryn Mawr, PA, Rachel King (Mark Mansoor) of Newton and Christopher King (Tara King) of Bellevue, WA; seven grandchildren, William, Sam, and Robb, Hannah and Matthew, Henry and Piper; and two step-grandchildren, Katharine Mancini and Matthew Mansoor. Bill is also survived by his younger brother, Richard King, of Worcester, MA; and several nephews and nieces. He was predeceased by his older brothers, Gilbert King, Jr. and Arthur King.

In his career as a corporate attorney at Goodwin, Bill was one of the pioneers of real estate investment trusts (REITs), and through his work, Goodwin became one of the preeminent law firms involved nationally in the real estate capital markets. For many years, Bill actively participated in the work of the National Association of REITs and in 1995, received its Industry Leadership Award.

Throughout his adult life, Bill was an active participant in Cambridge civic affairs, serving as president of the Cambridge Civic Association (1965-67); a trustee of the Buckingham School and, after its merger, of Buckingham Browne & Nichols School during the 1970s, a corporator for 50 years of the Cambridge Savings Bank and for 40 of those, a trustee and member of its Board of Investment, a corporator and later member of the Board of Overseers of Mount Auburn Hospital and in his later years, on the board of assisted living facility The Cambridge Homes.

In 1973, Bill was appointed a member of the Cambridge Historical Commission and, through reappointments by four city managers, served on the Commission for 44 years, 31 as Chair, before retiring in 2017. While initially joining the Commission to provide legal counsel, he became passionately interested in and committed to historical preservation over his decades of service. During his tenure, the Commission was the driving force in urging the Cambridge City Council to use such preservation tools as demolition delay and local landmark/neighborhood conservation districts that might then influence redevelopment of significant properties. As Chair, Bill was known for his fairness and determination to hear from every side of an issue. In 2015, he was among the first recipients of Francis H. Duehay Volunteer Public Service Award, granted by Cambridge’s mayor, and in 2017, the Cambridge Historical Commission gave him its Preservation Award upon his retirement.

In 2019, Bill and Sheila left Cambridge, after more than 60 years, to begin a new life at North Hill, a retirement community in Needham. Bill enjoyed a full and busy next chapter there, avidly participating in classes, committees, and conversation groups, and making many good friends. In 2022, Bill’s lifelong commitment to serving the surrounding community led him to run for and win a seat on the Needham Town Meeting, becoming an elected official for the first time at age 90. Ever the optimist, he ran again and was elected to a second three-year term earlier this year.

Despite his many accomplishments, Bill was humble and always gave credit to his mentors and mentees. He took deep interest in others, drawing out their stories and then remembering every detail about them for years thereafter. He was highly social, enjoyed bringing people together, and had an open, generous spirit with all he met. He loved his work, his vegetable garden at the family summer home in Phillipston, travel, history and biography, good food and martinis, and especially classical music, which brought him pleasure and comfort right to the end. Indeed, to the bemusement of his doctors, his immediate regret upon learning of his advanced diagnosis was that he had just ordered his tickets for the Boston Symphony’s 2025-26 season.

A Celebration of Bill’s Life will be held on Saturday, August 9, at 11am, at St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church, in Wellesley, MA, standrewswellesley.org Livestream of the service will be available on the St. Andrews website.

Contributions in memory of William B. King can be made to Cambridge Community Foundation, cambridgecf.org or Mount Grace Land Conservation Trust, mountgrace.org

View the online memorial for William Bruce “Bill” KING

To plant trees in memory, please visit the Sympathy Store. Published by Boston Globe from July 26 to July 27, 2025.

Note: Bill King was a great man, a good friend, and a brilliant observer and participant in Cambridge civic affairs. - RW

Lessons in Inclusionary Zoning - by Patrick Barrett

Urgent Legal and Policy Concerns Regarding Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (May 1, 2025)

Follow-Up Memo on Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Concerns Under MBTA Communities Act Compliance (June 11, 2025)

Nomination Papers - 2025 Municipal Election (FINAL - July 31 - the deadline)

as of Fri, Aug 1, 12:00pm

Nomination Signatures submitted and now officially certified by the Election Commission:

2025 Cambridge Candidate Pages

We currently have the following lineups for City Council and School Committee:

Notes:

(1) Louise Venden failed to submit nomination signatures but has indicated her intention to run for City Council as a write-in candidate. [Aug 1]

(2) Caitlin Dube qualified for both the City Council and the School Committee ballots but has decided to run only for School Committee. [Aug 2]

(3) Candidates have until Monday, Aug 18 at 5:00pm to file with the Election Commission for withdrawal of nomination (689 Mass. Ave.)

War Chests - 2025 City Council Candidates (and Political Action Committees)

Total Receipts: Jan 1, 2024 - Present	Percent Cambridge Receipts: Jan 1, 2024 - Present
Percent Union Receipts: Jan 1, 2024 - Present	Total Expenditures: Jan 1, 2024 - Present

Cambridge Candidate Pages - 2025

Aug 6, 2025 – Without any prompting, I have already received photos, contact and website information, and a variety of candidate statements from most of this year’s municipal election candidates. I generally get all such contributions up on the Cambridge Candidate Pages as soon I receive them - and I only edit for punctuation and spelling (and perhaps some slight formatting changes). [I will not, however, permit any overtly hateful statements.] You can also send any changes/additions right up until Election Day (within reason, of course, as I do have other things to do with my time).

If you are a candidate, send me your stuff via email: election2025@cambridgecivic.com. If you are a friend of one of the candidates, send me their contact information – or have the candidate or campaign helper contact me directly.

Check out some of the other Candidate Pages for a sample of the kinds of things candidates choose to post on their Candidate Pages.

I only post what the candidates send me - no opinions, no bias. This is all about creating a level playing field for all candidates.

Note: If it bothers you that I am also a candidate, there’s not much I can do about that. I have been providing this service since 2001 - almost a quarter century now - and will continue to do so for as long as I am able. - Robert Winters, Editor, Cambridge Civic Journal

Emerging and Converging Political Factions

Aug 18 – Candidates continue to send me materials for their Candidate Pages and I generally get those posted soon after I get them. You all can thank me later.

I’m also a City Council candidate, and the usual barrage of questionnaires from advocacy groups have been arriving. I’ll be answering some of them but, quite frankly, some are simply not worth wasting my time answering such narrow-minded, self-serving interests that leave candidates little room for nuance, explanation, historical perspective, or much of anything else. It will be interesting to see which candidates dish out all the BS the advocates want to hear in their endless quest for endorsements from a handful of self-anointed, self-appointed activists. Yeah, you know who I’m talking about.

One of the more curious things I have seen emerging over the last few years and municipal election cycles is the coalescence of the left-wing activist groups - including several groups that have emerged relatively recently which are at least somewhat centered around particular candidates. In addition to the Our Revolution gang (ORC), the highly problematic local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the Cambridge Residents Alliance (CResA) which has become indistinguishable from the DSA, we now have groups calling themselves the Cambridge Housing Justice Coalition (CHJC) and the Cambridge Housing Affordability Organizers (CHAO). In classic chicken-and-egg fashion, it’s hard to say whether the groups have grown around the candidates or if the candidates were spawned by the groups. Many of the same individuals are affiliated with several of these groups. Perhaps most interesting this year is that essentially all of the leftist groups have settled on a common questionnaire promoted by something known as the “Cambridge Progressive Electoral Collaboration”.

Personally, I won’t be answering that questionnaire for a number of reasons. First, there’s no way in Cambridge or on Earth that a centrist like me would ever be supported by the radicals behind this “collaboration”. Second, any group that wants to grill Cambridge candidates on their views regarding Israel and Gaza doesn’t really deserve a response from a municipal election candidate – though I’m sure some of the current candidates will be thrilled to express their views from the river to the sea. Our local socialist loonies are likely looking to Mamdani and New York City for inspiration. Could they add a City Council seat this year? Perhaps, but I really hope not. We are actually in a moment where fiscal restraint should be the call of the day, but we could end up with 5 votes calling for the City Manager to drain our “free cash” in order to fund every imaginable giveaway.

The “A Better Cambridge” faction will, no doubt, sell its slate on the usual promise of housing affordability, but all they really want to do is turn every parcel into a lucrative development opportunity – even if all of the neighbors object. [The ABCers will simply call them all NIMBYs or worse.] I do find it striking that during all the years when “affordable housing” has been the expressed goal of most aspiring City Council candidates, that train has been traveling steadily in the opposite direction. The current pitch is that increased supply will cure all ills, but my guess is that we’ll mainly see more investment vehicles where people (many of them non-residents) can store their wealth. So many landlords, so little time.

Just about every School Committee candidate says they want to narrow the “achievement gap” and provide for the needs of all children (they always italicize the all), yet that gap always seems to grow wider. Even though I am a candidate for City Council, I’m actually quite interested in what’s going on with the School Committee election. There are several matters that have motivated so many candidates to run for School Committee, e.g. the closing of the Kennedy-Longfellow School, the early firing of the previous School Superintendent, the current process to select the next Superintendent, and (at least I hope) the neverending hope for improved educational outcomes - especially in math and science. I don’t really get too jazzed about all the equity talk. Not surprisingly (considering what I do for a living) I just want to see everyone succeed in math and science.

Though I like most of the candidates under the “Cambridge Citizens Coalition” umbrella, they apparently have no criteria for candidate endorsement other than personal whim. I am actually more comfortable as a candidate being completely independent of all the factions.

Then there’s The Bike People, their irrational beliefs, and their total disregard for any residents who travel on more than two wheels.

We may or may not see the proposed new City Charter on this year’s ballot. The clock is ticking. I would love to have the opportunity to talk about the tortured process that led to the current proposal.

Enough for now. - RW

Comments?

Summer Camp – August 4, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

Incumbent councillors will take a break from their election-related fundraising and glad-handing to take up the following items and more:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a federal update including an update on relevant court cases. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments of members to the Commercial Parking Control Committee (CPCC).
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $704,800, received from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission Community Mitigation Fund …
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item #25-15 regarding the creation of plaque upholding the separation of church and state and gender equality.
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of John Nardone as a member of the Community Preservation Act Committee (CPAC) for a term of five years.
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-28, regarding an update on the status of potential civilian flagger operations in the Cambridge Police Union contract.
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $30,000, received from the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health’s (DMH) Jail Diversion Program, to the Grant Fund Police Department Other Ordinary Maintenance account ($30,000). This appropriation if approved represents funding through the first quarter of FY26. These funds, if approved will enable the department to continue the current co-response program with one clinician through September 2025.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #19. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-26, regarding a list of public and private spaces available to the public, indoors and outdoors. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #20. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the submission of the 2025 Affordable Housing Overlay Annual Report. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #21. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-35, regarding a request that the City Manager explore and establish a City of Cambridge Electronic Records Archiving Policy. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #22. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-36, regarding a further response to the request that the exception language in Chapter 2.129.040 Section J of the Cambridge Municipal Code be revised with language clarifying that Cambridge city employees shall not participate in federal immigration enforcement operations and that the sole role of Cambridge city employees during any action by ICE is only to protect public safety and not to assist or facilitate the work of ICE. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-36, regarding a request that the language of the Welcoming Community Ordinance be amended to clarify that City employees shall not participate in federal immigration enforcement operations and that the sole role of City employees during any action by ICE is only to protect public safety, and be amended to clarify that if Cambridge Police Department Officers respond to the scene of ICE action, CPD Officers should document the actions of ICE including their badge numbers. [Passed to 2nd Reading, Referred to Ordinance Committee June 30, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained July 21, 2025]
Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #9. An Ordinance has been received from Interim City Clerk Paula M. Crane, relative to Chapter 2.129 Welcoming Community. [Passed to 2nd Reading June 30, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained July 21, 2025]
Ordained as Amended 9-0; Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Committee Report #7. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on July 28, 2025 to discuss updates to the City’s Welcoming Community Ordinance. The Committee voted favorably to forward the proposed amendments to the Welcoming Community Ordinance to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #23. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report regarding the Marasao, et al., Zoning Petition (Religious Uses). [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #24. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order Number 25-101, regarding Marasao, et al., Zoning Petition. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #8. An Ordinance has been received from Paula M. Crane, Interim City Clerk, relative the Mushla Marasao et al Zoning petition in regard to Article 5.28.21, 8.22.1, 8.22.2, Tbl 5.1. [Passed to 2nd Reading June 30, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained July 21, 2025; Expires Aug 18, 2025]
Ordained as Amended by Substitution 9-0; Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department, in collaboration with the Finance Department, to conduct a comprehensive review of current permitting fees for residential development projects, with a focus on identifying opportunities to create a tiered fee structure that reduces or eliminates fees entirely particularly for smaller-scale and affordable housing developments.   Councillor Toner, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to allocate $25,000 in feasibility funds to support an exploratory process – potentially including stakeholder engagement, legal and technical assessments, and community outreach – to evaluate the creation of a Business Improvement District in Porter Square.   Councillor Toner, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor McGovern
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #4. Declaring August 9, 2025, as Rocky Horror Day in the City of Cambridge.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Mayor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #7. That the City Council go on record urging Governor of the Commonwealth Maura Healey and the Massachusetts Legislature to act without delay to safeguard the constitutional rights of indigent defendants and preserve the integrity of the Commonwealth’s criminal justice system by increasing compensation rates for bar advocates to ensure adequate participation statewide, and establishing pay parity with neighboring states and competitive future rates to prevent recurring crises.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Wilson, Vice Mayor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0

Unfinished Business #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a revised draft of the “Eastern Cambridge Community Enhancements” Zoning Petition. [Placed on Unfinished Business, June 9, 2025]
Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #6. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to East Cambridge Community Enhancement Overlay District (“ECCE Overlay District”), which is governed by the regulations and procedures specified in this Section 20.1200. It is the intent of this Section that these regulations will apply to land within the ECCE Overlay District. [Passed to 2nd Reading, June 9, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained June 30, 2025; Expires Aug 18, 2025]
Ordained as Amended 8-1 (Toner - No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Manager’s Agenda #25 (Late). A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a revised Letter of Commitment dated August 4, 2025 submitted on behalf of BMR-320 Charles LLC that will be incorporated by reference in the East Cambridge Community Enhancement Overlay District (ECCE District) if the Council adopts the zoning petition. [text of report]
Placed on File as Amended 8-1 (Toner - NO)

Applications & Petitions #4. A Zoning Petition has been received from Martin Bakal in regard to Table 4.30, Sec. 4.40 Footnote with the intent of Restrictions on increasing pavement in Open Space Districts. [text of petition]
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 9-0

Resolution #5. Condolences to the family of William Bruce “Bill” King.   Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toner

Resolution #6. Resolution on the death of Tom Lehrer.   Mayor Simmons

Resolution #9. Retirement of Dr. Lisa Dobberteen from the Cambridge Public Health Department.   Vice Mayor McGovern

Committee Report #4. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee and the Housing Committee held a joint public hearing on June 17, 2025 to discuss draft zoning recommendations for Cambridge Street and Massachusetts Avenue. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #6. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on June 23, 2025 for the purpose of inviting representatives from the 23 long term vacant properties (defined as has been vacant for more than five years) on the record, to share updates on their tenancy efforts, short and long-term plans, and to provide the community with an opportunity to weigh in on this important discussion. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Late Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from Councillors Sobrinho-Wheeler, Nolan, Azeem, and Siddiqui transmitting a memorandum regarding shared questions and concerns regarding the recent incident at 243 Broadway involving the Cambridge Police Department on August 2, 2025. [text of report]
Referred to Public Safety Committee and City Manager’s Office 9-0

Comments?

July 21, 2025 and July 23, 2025 Cambridge City Council Special Meetings

There were two very significant Special Meetings of the Cambridge City Council in July 2025. The first meeting (July 21) featured a $4.3 million financial settlement appropriation relating to the City’s eminent domain taking of the Vail Court property on Bishop Allen Drive in September 2016. The second meeting (July 23) featured a $20 million appropriation relating to the Riverview Condominium (221 Mt. Auburn St.) emergency.

Vail Court (July 21)

Manager’s Agenda #1.Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of Four-Million-Three-Hundred-Thousand dollars and no cents ($4,300,000), from the General Fund Employee Benefits Department Salary and Wages account to the General Fund Law Travel and Training (Judgment and Damages) account for the settlement payment relating to Said S. Abuzahra, Trustee of Equity Realty Trust, et al. v. City of Cambridge (Mdsx. Super. Ct. Docket No. 2017- cv2459/J). (CM25#188)
Order Adopted 7-0-2 (Siddiqui, Zusy – Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a request to move to Executive Session (if necessary) to discuss litigation regarding 221 Mount Auburn Street because discussing this in an open session may have a detrimental effect on the City’s litigating position. (CM25#187)
Placed on File 9-0

Riverview Condominiums (July 23)

Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $20,000,000 from the General Fund Employee Benefits Department Salary and Wages account to the General Fund Reserve Department Extraordinary Expenditures account to fund expenses related to the demolition of 221 Mount Auburn Street. (CM25#186) [text of report][July 10, 2025 Presentation]
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Wilson – Absent); Reconsideration Fails 0-8-1 (Toner Absent)

Comments?

Featured Items on the June 30, 2025 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Starting next week, incumbents and challengers will be pulling nomination papers for City Council and School Committee and transforming into salesmen and saleswomen. Here are some of the interesting agenda items before the snake oils sales commence:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a federal update and the Law Department will provide an update on relevant court cases. (CM25#177) [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by Yi-An Huang, City Solicitor Megan Bayer, Asst City Solicitor LaBianca; Placed on File 9-0

There are 27 court cases listed in this report.

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the 2024 Transportation Demand Management Program Report. (CM25#179) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Brooke McKenna (TD), Ryan McKinnon (TD), Zusy, Azeem; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-30, regarding a review of barriers to housing production, a timeline for next Inclusionary Housing Study, and the feasibility of additional development incentives. (CM25#180) [text of report]
pulled by Azeem; comments by Azeem, Simmons, Melissa Peters (CDD), Chris Cotter (HD), Toner, Nolan, Yi-An Huang, McGovern, Zusy, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson; Placed on File 9-0

In addition to the Cotter report, you may want to also take a look at these two articles by Patrick Barrett:

1) Urgent Legal and Policy Concerns Regarding Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (May 2, 2025)

2) Follow-Up Memo on Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Concerns Under MBTA Communities Act Compliance (June 14, 2025)

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-36, regarding a request that the language of the Welcoming Community Ordinance be amended to clarify that City employees shall not participate in federal immigration enforcement operations and that the sole role of City employees during any action by ICE is only to protect public safety, and be amended to clarify that if Cambridge Police Department Officers respond to the scene of ICE action, CPD Officers should document the actions of ICE including their badge numbers. (CM25#181) [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by Sobrinho-Wheeler, Megan Bayer, Nolan, Siddiqui, Simmons, Supt. Pauline Carter-Wells (CPD); Referred to Ordinance Committee and Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on the first half of 2025. (CM25#183) [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the 2025 Goals and Metrics for the Annual City Manager Performance Review. (CM25#184) [text of report]
pulled by Wilson; comments by Wilson, Yi-An Huang, Siddiqui, Nolan; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Florrie Darwin, Scott Kyle, and Michael Rogove; and the reappointments of Chandra Harrington, Joseph Ferrara, Kyle Sheffield, Gavin Kleespies, Paula Paris, Elizabeth Lyster, and Yuting Zhang as members of the Cambridge Historical Commission. (CM25#185) [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by Sobrinho-Wheeler, Zusy, Simmons, Charles Sullivan (Hist. Comm.), Azeem, McGovern; Substitute Order Appointments Adopted 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public hearing on Wednesday, June 25, 2025 to discuss term limits and appointments to Neighborhood Conservation Districts and the Historical Commission, CM25#145, CM25#146, and CM25#147. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee voted favorably to forward CM25#145, CM25#146, and CM25#147 to the full City Council with no recommendation. [text of report]
Taken up early along w/Mgr #8; All Appointments Approved as Amended; Report Accepted, Placed on File as Amended 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to explore creative solutions that reduce car dependency, while expanding access to parking options nearby Broadway.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Simmons; comments by Simmons, Nolan, Zusy; Order Adopted 8-1 (Simmons - No)

File this under “Adding Insult to Injury”. These councillors are apparently incapable of listening to the actual concerns expressed by affected residents.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the City Solicitor to ensure that the wording for the proposed amendment to Section 5.40 Footnote #2 is in line with the City Council’s intention to continue to include the inclusionary requirement for any nonreligious use property that is going above four stories, and to strike “except for religious purposes” used from Section 5.40 Footnotes #1 and #37.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0

Yet another example, of this City Council’s “Break It First, Then Pick Up The Pieces” philosophy.

Order #3. That the Mayor is hereby appointing a committee, to be announced in the coming days, to screen applicants for the position of City Clerk.   Mayor Simmons, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Toner
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to continue to work with stakeholders in the area including Harvard University and the Harvard Square Business Association to pursue options for pedestrianization on Lower Bow Street and to report on the option for automatic bollards for Winthrop and/or Bow Street.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to prepare an interim report on demolition requests and building permit applications, in order to facilitate a discussion on the outcomes observed during the first six months of the new Multifamily Housing Zoning.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Zusy, McGovern, Azeem; Order Adopted 9-0

Yet another example, of this City Council’s “Break It First, Then Pick Up The Pieces” philosophy.

Order #6. That the Human Services and Veterans Committee hold a meeting in Fall 2025 and extend an invitation to the Superintendent of Cambridge Public Schools and the School Committee to discuss the progress and future direction of the Cambridge Preschool Program.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Zusy; comments by Siddiqui, Wilson, Zusy, Nolan; Order Adopted 9-0

Community Benefits for Whom?

Unfinished Business #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a revised draft of the “Eastern Cambridge Community Enhancements” Zoning Petition. [Placed on Unfinished Business, June 9, 2025] (CM25#153)
No Action Taken, Votes Expected Aug 4

Unfinished Business #6. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to East Cambridge Community Enhancement Overlay District (“ECCE Overlay District”), which is governed by the regulations and procedures specified in this Section 20.1200. It is the intent of this Section that these regulations will apply to land within the ECCE Overlay District. [Passed to 2nd Reading, June 9, 2025] (ORD25#10)
pulled for discussion (JSW); comments by Yi-An Huang, Zusy, Simmons, Megan Bayer, Sobrinho-Wheeler, McGovern, Wilson, Siddiqui, Toner, Azeem, Nolan; No Action Taken, Votes Expected Aug 4

There is a brewing controversy associated with this zoning petition and, more specifically, the proposed community benefits agreement tied to the petition that would, in particular, greatly benefit the East End House (~$20 million). I suspect this may be the featured item during Public Comment.

Original BioMed Petition Text (Mar 17)     Petitioner Revisions (Apr 18)     CDD Memo (Apr 24)

Planning Board Presentation (Apr 29)     Planning Board Report (May 19) - original document     Ordinance Committee Agenda (May 20)

Ordinance Committee Report (June 9)     DS,MM,SS,AW Reallocation Memo (June 9)     Order #3 (PO25#96) (June 23)

Cambridge Community Center 6/26 message (“URGENT! Ask City Council to delay the inequitable disbursement of over $20 million”)

Follow-up CCC 6/29 message (“Our Collective Response to Representative Mike Connolly’s Letter to the City Council”)
[I haven’t yet seen Connolly’s letter to the City Council, but I’m sure it is characteristically ill-informed.]

Joint Response from CCC, CAC, CEOC, and The Dance Complex

This controversy reminds me of what then-City Manager Robert Healy reportedly said when informed of the gift of the Foundry building to the City in conjunction with a zoning petition then being sought: “This is going to be a problem.” Indeed, there was competition almost immediately among councillors for their pet projects that might be located in this windfall building. In the end, the cost associated with retrofitting the building for its current use was, I believe, well in excess of the value of the gift. I am also reminded of how the provision of ARPA funds turned into a competition among many interested parties and their City Council sponsors - including the Rise Up Cambridge local welfare program that then-Mayor Siddiqui incessantly associates with her own name. I may have some of the timeline confused, but I am also reminded of then-Councillor Sam Seidel’s effort to come up with an equitable way of distributing benefits derived from “contract zoning” - more often than not in and around East Cambridge (or, as Heather Hoffman often describes it, “the eastern sacrifice zone”).

I have been to many events held at the Cambridge Community Center on Callender Street in the Riverside neighborhood, and each time I am there I have taken note of the deterioration of the building - and the window frames and sills in particular. It is abundantly clear that this important building needs some love. Perhaps Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds could be used for this purpose, but the Affordable Housing Trust would likely oppose that. The public policy question is whether (and how) revenues derived from projects in one part of the city should be appropriated that is fair to all residents of the city but at the same time primarily benefits those neighborhoods most affected by this new development.

I am not convinced that the current City Council is particularly skilled at answering these questions. Their approach in recent years has become more imperious and less concerned about the impacts in areas and along streets most affected by their “progressive” policy decisions.

The ECCE Overlay District Petition expires August 18. Though it is expected to be voted on June 30, it could be delayed until the Midsummer City Council meeting on Aug 4.

Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Wednesday, June 18, 2025 to continue the discussion on a Zoning Petition by Mushla Marasao, et al. to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance in Sections 5.28.21, 8.22.1, 8.22.2, and Table 5.1 with the intent to remove gross floor area (GFA) and floor area ratio (FAR) limitations for religious uses, permit conforming additions to nonconforming structures without limitation for religious uses, and permit religious uses with the same dimensional limitations as residential uses except that in a Residence C-1 district permeable open space would not be required, buildings would be permitted up to 6 stories and 74 feet above grade without meeting inclusionary housing requirements, and buildings taller than 35 feet and 3 stories above grade would not be required to notify neighbors and hold a meeting. The Ordinance Committee voted favorably to forward the Mushla Marasao, et al. Zoning Petition to the full City Council with no recommendation. [text of report]
Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Resolution #8. Congratulations to Joseph Grassi on his retirement from the Cambridge Police Department.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons

Resolution #18. Congratulations to Officer Robert P. Reardon on his promotion to the rank of Sergeant with the Cambridge Police Department.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons

Resolution #20. Congratulations to Superintendent Pauline Wells on being awarded the 2025 Massachusetts Association of Women in Law Enforcement Organization Heritage Award.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons

Resolution #24. Congratulations to Donald “Ducky” Down on his retirement from the Department of Public Works.   Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern

Note: The meeting was preceded by a tribute to Charles Sullivan for his 51 years of service (and counting) to the City of Cambridge. Later in the meeting there were extensive comments of heartfelt thanks and farewell to retiring Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan.

Comments?

When Representation Fails to be Representative – June 23, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (abridged)

In Cambridge we like to tout our Proportional Representation (PR) election system as superior to other systems, and in many ways this is true. There is one question, however, that has been nagging at me for some time: “Proportional to what?” During the heyday of Cambridge rent control, it was pretty clearly the case that the City Council was in a similar proportion to the tenant-dominated electorate and that many, perhaps most, voters at that time were guided by that one dominant issue before considering any other issues or candidate traits. After the demise of rent control after Question 9 in 1994, the dominance of the rent control issue faded quickly and we entered a prolonged period where individual personalities and legacy affiliations guided local electoral choices. The notion of proportionality became more of a relic than anything else. In recent years, we have seen the rise of single-issue politics (density, subsidized housing, bike lanes, preservation), but identity politics is as much of a factor as any polarized issue. The question of “Proportional to what?” could not be muddier. What I find most aggravating is how single-issue advocates quote municipal election results to argue why their single issue is somehow reflective of the will of the electorate. There are so many confounding factors involved in voter choice that it is simply never valid to draw conclusions on issues that were not explicitly on the ballot.

Last week’s meeting featured 4 Orders that either directly or indirectly addressed the question of installing separated cycle tracks on Broadway and the loss of on-street parking and curb access. It was an interesting mix of political theater, dismissal of the concerns of many petitioners (mainly older and working class voters), and some degree of betrayal and political favoritism. Costumes and props were plentiful, and facts were in short supply as assertions of treacherous conditions on Broadway were made that bore very little resemblance to the actual reality that residents on and around Broadway see every day. Perhaps those who question the plans for Broadway should have shown up with walkers and work clothes. We are now living in a version of Cambridge where unicorns are real and nobody has any need for a car or for parking. City policies are based on wishful thinking and capitulation to advocacy groups flush with cash and social media savvy. Our City Manager seems unable or unwilling to question the advocates embedded in his own City departments. Reason and compromise have no place in this new Cambridge, and older people and working class people should just suck it up. They clearly don’t count in the political calculus of people named Azeem, Sobrinho-Wheeler, McGovern, and Siddiqui, and they are at best dangled along by others named Nolan and Zusy. Our City Council, and probably our School Committee, is now proportional in name only.

Random Observations (June 3, 2025):

For many decades the Cambridge political dichotomy was defined as the Cambridge Civic Association (CCA) vs. the Independents. At various times this was aligned with the Town vs. Gown divide, and (except for councillors from East Cambridge) also associated with the division between those who favored rent control vs. those who were opposed. During the 1990s, the CCA was largely associated with downzoning and limiting commercial development, while the Independents were generally in favor of new development and growing the tax base (which also kept residential property tax rates low). Everything changed after the demise of rent control (1994) though the political labels and voting patterns persisted for another decade or so.

Over the last decade we have seen the rise of new political associations and their associated candidate slates. The Cambridge Residents Alliance (CResA) arose largely in opposition to residential development proposals in and around Central Square. This led to the formation of an opposition group that later came to be known as “A Better Cambridge” (ABC) - initially in support of transit-oriented development, especially in and around Central Square. Some principal leaders in the ABC group were also affiliated with non-profit subsidized housing developers and, with the emergence of the national “YIMBY” movement, ABC shifted its focus toward such local initiatives as the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) which, for the most part, has further concentrated subsidized housing within existing properties owned by the Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) and other nonprofit housing developers. ABC has shifted more recently toward a general “densification” philosophy - promoting dense housing development (market-rate and otherwise) anywhere and everywhere rather than just transit-oriented development. “Smart Growth” has yielded to just “Growth and Density” - even at the cost of so-called “naturally occurring affordable housing” and any notions of historic preservation. [This is why I generally refer top ABC as “A Bigger Cambridge”.] The ABC attitude toward such things as “neighborhood conservation districts” (NCDs) can only be described as hostility.

Somewhere along the line, a counter-organization, the Cambridge Citizens Coalition (CCC), came into existence - largely centered around themes of limited growth, especially in existing, relatively established neighborhoods. They have also been solidly in favor of historic preservation where appropriate. In many respects, the new political dichotomy has become CCC vs. ABC, but it’s more complicated than just that. Reflecting current national trends, there has also been a relatively small but nontrivial growth in hard-left political identifications - primarily Sunrise Boston (not sure if they’re still around), Our Revolution Cambridge (ORC - an offshoot of the Bernie Sanders campaigns), and the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). These groups appear to draw support primarily among college-age and recent graduates of our local universities, and the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel crowd largely aligns with the DSA (as well as other national entities like the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) - an offshoot of the “Answer Coalition”. I don’t know that there’s much value added to local government with affiliation to what are effectively fringe national political parties - and hate-filled ones to boot. The Cambridge Residents Alliance, comprised mainly of much older people, has effectively become the aged wing of the local DSA (though Our Revolution has a few aging Marxists as well).

Then there’s the bicycle crowd, primarily the well-funded Cambridge Bike Safety group. They really are the ultimate single-issue group - even more than ABC and its density-above-all focus. There are also counter-efforts such as Cambridge Streets for All (CSA) that has pushed back against the rather hostile revised Bicycle Safety Ordinance (2020) that mandates separated bike lanes that are sometimes reasonable but often arbitrary and problematic. Just as is the case currently in Washington, DC, some matters come down to just raw political power and influence - regardless of sense or effectiveness.

In an interesting twist, people who would have at one time been associated with the CCA and many “townies” who at one time been associated with the Independents, now find themselves (whether or not they realize it) on the same side of the current political dichotomy. They are all what the ABC affiliates would dismiss (with great hostility) as “Neighborhood Defenders” - a term taken from the title of what has essentially become the ABC bible. Preserving quality of life (“liveability”), maintaining adequate parking, tree protection, etc. are viewed in the ABC world much the same way that Robert Moses dismissed the views of Jane Jacobs.

Things line up (more or less) these days as (1) long-time residents (townies) and the CCC, (2) pro-development supporters (ABC), and (3) Leftists and anti-capitalists (who dislike group (1) as the local aristocrats and entitled “boomers” and remain uncomfortable with group (2) because development is associated with capitalists. The bicycle obsessives are less easy to categorize. There are also several small groups emerging (and likely centered on a candidate or two) such as the Cambridge Housing Affordability Organizers (CHAO - seemingly mostly Harvard affiliates) and the Cambridge Housing Justice Coalition (CHJC - very fringy and anti-capitalist) which align with the hard-left and rent control advocacy.

I just wish there was a clear “reasonable” political tent under which some of us could comfortably camp out. - Robert Winters

Volunteer Opportunities - Cambridge Boards & Commissions (click for details)

Foundry Advisory Committee Vacancy - deadline Monday, September 15, 2025

Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) Board Vacancy for CHA/Affiliate Housing Resident - deadline Monday, August 25, 2025