Winter 2002 Notes
March 25, 2002 - The Cambridge City Council tonight passed a home rule petition
to the state legislature that would lower the voting age to 17 for municipal
elections only. A similar measure that would have lowered the voting age to 16
failed last year on a 4-5 vote. The measure passed decisively tonight on an
8-1 vote with only Councillor Maher voting against the measure. Notable was
the fact that Councillors Marjorie Decker, Tim Toomey, Anthony Galluccio, and
Mayor Michael Sullivan voted in favor of the current measure after having voted
against the similar measure last year.
The matter now goes to the State House where its future is
uncertain. There are several previous home rule petitions from Cambridge that
are still languishing on Beacon Hill.
March 2002 - Election Reform News from San Francisco and
Vermont
History was made on March 5, when more than 56% of San Francisco voters gave a
big thumb's up to adopting instant runoff voting for electing their most
important offices, including mayor. Across the country, voters in 50 cities and
towns in rural Vermont endorsed a proposal to use instant runoff voting (IRV)
for electing statewide offices.
Despite a well-financed campaign by defenders of the status quo who spent perhaps as much as $100,000 or more trying to confuse voters with slick mailings, San Francisco now becomes the first major American city to use IRV to elect its officials. It replaces two-round runoff elections that cost more than a million dollars a year, lead to low voter turnout and negative campaigning and exacerbate campaign financing demands. Depending on the capacity of the City's Department of Elections, IRV will be used either this fall or in November 2003.
Center for Voting and Democracy staff members Steven Hill and Caleb Kleppner developed a remarkable grassroots campaign, full of volunteer energy, that delivered more than 125,000 door-hangers in targeted precincts around the city. Leading civic organizations and elected officials rose to the challenge as well; endorsers included Rep. Kevin Shelley, who won the Democratic Party nomination for Secretary of State this week, and the Sierra Club, San Francisco Labor Council, Common Cause, NOW, Congress of California Seniors, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Latino Democratic Club, Libertarian Party, Democratic Party, Green Party and CalPIRG.
In Vermont, 51of 54 town meetings supported a League of Women Voters-sponsored proposal to use IRV for electing statewide offices. Vermont IRV backers range from Democratic Governor Howard Dean and Secretary of State Deborah Markowitz to 2000 Republican gubernatorial nominee Ruth Dwyer, Common Cause and the Grange. Our New England regional director Terry Bouricius did masterful work on this effort on a shoestring budget.
Instant runoff voting (IRV) has the potential to crack open electoral politics to new voices and better choices. Used for major elections in Australia, Ireland and Great Britain, IRV ensures that candidates win with majority support in one efficient election. Voters indicate both their favorite and their runoff choices on the same ballot. If no candidate receives a winning majority of first choices, the weak candidates are eliminated. Just as in a delayed runoff, their supporters choose among the runoff finalists as indicated by the next-choices preferences marked on their ballots. Voters who ranked one of the finalists first continue to have their votes count for their favorite choice.
You can read much more about instant runoff voting, the win in
San Francisco and the near-sweep of Vermont town meeting votes on-line. Please
see:
* The Center's news release and two pre-election articles at http://fairvote.org/sf/robmessage.htm
* A range of news and information about instant runoff voting at: http://www.fairvote.org/irv
* The San Francisco campaign's website has been
discontinued.
* Coverage at http://www.alternet.org, http://www.tompaine.com and http://www.thenation.com/thebeat
Update by Rob Richie, Center for Voting and Democracy (CVD)
News from Fresh Pond (Feb 28):
Cambridge's state-of-the-art
water treatment facility at Fresh Pond went back into operation on Wednesday,
Feb 27. You will likely notice some (positive) differences in your water now
that we're making and delivering our own water and are no longer buying it from
the MWRA. Financial responsibility for the repairs and for the purchase of water
for the last five months is not yet settled, but it appears to be a good bet
that the contractor or its insurance company will have to cover whatever
increases in cost were attributable to last September's major failure at the
plant.
The Feb 28 Special Joint City Council and School Committee Meeting at Fresh Pond was one of the more interesting meetings I've attended in a long time. Unlike the joint meeting of last spring, this was a remarkably civil and constructive discussion. If our elected officials handled themselves like this as a rule, there would be no basis for public criticism. There was genuine interest in what's happening in the Cambridge schools and the sincere desire of everyone present to do whatever it takes to navigate through upcoming school mergers and closures, significant hiring of new teachers to replace those who are retiring or leaving, and to get the revived Rindge School of Technical Arts (RSTA) up and running. Every member of both elected bodies was in attendance.
This meeting was especially informative about actions taken in the wake of the Spence Report and especially about RSTA, which has now had its accreditation restored (18 months ahead of schedule). There was real passion from Councillors Galluccio, Reeves, Decker, Simmons, Toomey, and Mayor Sullivan and from School Committee members Harding, Fantini, and Grassi when they spoke about RSTA. Easily the most contentious issue was whether CRLS students should be permitted to choose Minuteman Tech over the growing and improving RSTA. It's something of a Catch-22 in that public confidence in RSTA is necessary for its improvement but incentives are being offered by Minuteman to draw students away from RSTA. Executive Director Stephen Spofford pitched the RSTA program with gusto to all the elected officials and invited everyone to visit and see for themselves how far they've come in just eight months. In past years, RSTA was seen as a de facto dumping ground which was eventually abandoned. This fact is one reason why some skepticism remains among some of the elected officials.
At least one school merger is a certainty this year, and word of which schools will be merged or closed should be coming very soon from School Superintendent Bobbie D'Alessandro. No schools have volunteered. Another merger/closure is likely in another year or two. Indications are that this year's merger/closure will be bundled with the creation of a new International Baccalaureate (IB) program. My impression was that this would be the carrot to go with the stick. There was a call for unity among councillors and school committee members when the ax falls. Some distress among affected parents and other residents is a foregone conclusion. Indications are that both elected bodies may hang tight through the process.
One thing about which everybody agreed was the need for the Cambridge School Department to be much more aggressive in recruiting the best teachers available. Numerous accounts were given of the recruiter from the Boston Public Schools being everywhere in Cambridge recruiting prospective teachers.
It was also disclosed at this meeting that the high school of the Somerville Charter School will be moving into the St. Mary's building in Area 4. Some city councillors had urged the City Manager to renew our lease with the Catholic Archdiocese, but the Manager reported that negotiations had recently broken down when the Archdiocese was inflexible in their demand not only for significant rent but also significant capital improvements to the building at Cambridge's expense. I was very surprised to hear that although Cambridge would be obliged to make the building fully ADA-compliant, the Somerville Charter School would not be so obliged. This represents a significant difference in the costs of renovation of the building. I will have to check out the truth of this assertion, but it sure would tilt the playing field.
From the Feb 25 City Council meeting:
Order #9 --- February 25, 2002
COUNCILLOR TOOMEY
WHEREAS: During the 2000-2001 City Council term there were several public
hearings relative to the issue of staffing for the City Council; and
WHEREAS: There was much public input and debate surrounding this issue; and
WHEREAS: The City budget for the 2002-2003 is presently being reviewed and
prepared by the City Manager; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Manager prepare a recommendation for the City Council, on
the creation of full time staff positions, including technical assistance,
research and analysis, for each City Councillor and a recommendation as
to how the existing City Council Office could work cooperatively and in
conjunction with individual Council aides; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Manager report back by March 18, 2002.
The order was referred to the Government Operations
Committee for hearings.
Translation - During a City
Council term where the issues are harder to find and where the budget will
likely be tighter, here comes a proposal to give each Councillor his or her own
personal assistant.
A more reasonable proposal that has been
discussed is that of hiring an additional staff person or two to assist in
research for some of the City Council committees, such as the Ordinance
Committee and the University Relations Committee, that may benefit from such
additional resources. This staff would be managed by the City Clerk's Office
which now staffs the City Council committees.