Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 5, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 611-612: March 5, 2024

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,Central Square,Charter,City Council,Deaths,planning — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:10 pm

Episode 611 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 5, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Mar 5, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Super Tuesday; Iran voting boycott vs. campaign for “No Preference”; Trump vs. Biden; ward committees; City Council less dysfunctional, more collaborative w/City Manager; Finance Committee – levy projections, call for restraint, need to maintain excess levy capacity; use of operating budget for affordable housing has consequences; anticipated 10%+ annual increases in levy coming; fewer building permits – revenue not subject to Prop 2½ limits; commercial values relatively flat – shift of levy from commercial to residential; within residential, condos get sweetest deal after residential exemption and most of the increases borne by single-, two-, and three-family properties; need for intervention now to avoid future need for overrides; councillors had luxury for years in not having to think about limitations; FY24 consolidated spending categories; note that every stick of affordable housing (deed restrictions) has de minimis tax revenue – receive far more value in services that tax generated. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 612 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 5, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Mar 5, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Mar 4 City Council meeting; PERF report – police-involved shooting, good recommendations, positive evaluation of CPD practices, less-lethal options, CPD to be first in Mass. with policy on releasing names of involved officers; Central Square Lots Study in parallel with zoning changes; other assets, adjacent properties; everyone loves Central Square until they don’t; demise of current Starlight Square, need for replacement; contradictory signals on whether to gather more information or take action; exclusive focus on “affordable housing” creates net financial negative in perpetuity – math doesn’t work; plan in concert with privately-owned adjacent lots, e.g. Bishop Allen/Prospect, Green/Pleasant lot and Needle Exchange building; 44 years and 24 studies – the never-ending study of Central Square; not just about making everything bigger – need to make things better, more creative and more interesting; death of Paul Ryder; Charter Review update – next steps, desire to control process, facets of City government via Special Acts that should be part of Charter or at least be referenced – License Commission, Election Commission, Traffic Board, Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge Housing Authority, Cambridge Redevelopment Authority; housing-related orders re: real estate transfer tax and municipally-funded vouchers (a real budget buster); the more we fund affordable housing the wider the gap in affordability. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 24, 2024

Gently Stepping Forward – February 26, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Central Square,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 2:12 pm

Gently Stepping Forward – February 26, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

City HallThe previous meeting featured some rather obvious jostling for position in the process of evaluating the recent Charter Review Final Report and deciding any charter change proposal. This week should bring even more of this power struggle when the question of “next steps” is taken up. The report has already been sent to the Law Department, the Election Commission, and perhaps more departments for review, but the question now is whether this should be initially vetted within the Government Operations Committee (chaired by Councillor Toner) or if Councillor Nolan (and perhaps others) will try to bypass that initial review by creating some kind of ad-hoc committee-of-the-whole so that she can gain more control of the process. This, of course, is intertwined with the election of Mayor Simmons who appoints all the City Council committees – and those appointments were done with some care.

I will say right now that some of the proposed Charter recommendations are virtually assured to be dead on arrival at the State House, but I don’t yet know if the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government (or whatever committee takes up such matters) can take an à-la-carte approach to proposed city charters or if it’s all-or-nothing. Before any modified Charter can go before Cambridge voters, it must first clear this hurdle.

I will also say that there are some aspects of the structure of Cambridge government that really should be rolled into any new Charter but which the Charter Review Committee never considered, e.g. the Special Acts that established/empowered the License Commission, the Election Commission, the Traffic Board, the Cambridge Health Alliance, the Cambridge Housing Authority, and the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority. It is commendable that the Committee chose to consolidate most of the charter specifics that were only referenced in the Plan E sections of M.G.L. Chapter 43 (sections 93-116) – at the suggestion of the Collins Center staff who were advising the Committee – but this was incomplete, probably because of lack of expertise on those specifics within the Collins Center staff. This is especially true of matters involving our proportional representation elections (an essential component of Plan E). There may be good reasons to leave some of these out of the Charter, but since they are part of how we do business, these questions should at least be part of the current discussion. [Needless to say, this should have been discussed within the now-dissolved Charter Review Committee, but that’s another conversation that has much to do with how that committee was formed.]

Here are the agenda items that caught my eye this week:

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to appointments and reappointments of members to the Cambridge Bicycle Committee.
pulled by Nolan; PN wants committees to be “commissions” so that City Council would gain more control over these appointments, asks about whether diversity of opinion is a factor in appointments; Iram Farooq claims there is some diversity, but acknowledges that these committees are primarily advocates rather than representatives; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to appointments and reappointments of members to the Cambridge Pedestrian Committee.
pulled by Nolan; no additional comments; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, Policy Order Response #24-15 dated Feb 12, 2024 regarding drafting zoning language and related changes to allow for and encourage the continued growth, redevelopment, and evolution of Central Square. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; JSW wants to know when this would go to Planning Board; Farooq says it goes to PB when petition is filed and during the process; Toner asks if this will build upon work already done; Farooq says YES, and that advisory committees need not be consulted (really?); Nolan suggests that better methods of informing community should be considered; Pickett asks if Central Square Lots study will be integrated and how; Farooq says study in its final stages; Wilson agrees re: communication with residents; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Charter Right #1. That the Final Report of the Charter Review Committee be referred to the Government Operations, Rules and Claims Committee. [Charter Right – Simmons, Feb 12, 2024]
Toner says conversation should start in Gov’t Operations Committee; Nolan OK with starting there, but says it should not stay there – noting that she and Siddiqui are “deeply involved in this” (quite the understatement); Pickett draws parallel with how possible Rules changes are now being considered in committee; Siddiqui OK with starting in committee, but will participate and “brainstorming” with suggestion of a robust process; Toner explains process of culling ideas from councillors, legal questions, timeline; Wilson wants a community conversation around this; Referred to Gov’t Ops. 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Resolution #6. Resolution on the death of Charles Fried.   Councillor Nolan

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to present recommendations for the refinement and improvement of the housing permitting process to the City Council, with a focus on reducing delays, minimizing costs, and enhancing clarity and accessibility for all stakeholders.   Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; Toner proposed amendments; JSW wants to keep “affordable” language, wants to add other groups for consultation; Toner motion to change “affordable housing” to “housing” Fails 2-6-1 (MM,PT-YES; PN,JP,SS,JSW,AW,DS-No; BA-Absent); Toner motion on simplifying processes to all housing and not just “affordable” housing, McGovern says middle-income housing should be included; Adopted 8-0-1; JSW motion to amend Toner motion to add two additional groups Adopted 8-0-1; Toner motion as amended Adopted 8-0-1; Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (BA Absent)

Order #2. City Council support of H.4138, The Affordable Homes Act, and urge legislators to retain the provisions for a location option transfer fee.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Toner; Toner will vote NO on proposed transfer fee; Nolan says Council has supported transfer fee in the past, delivers a prepared speech, says that this would not enact a tax or fee but only permit that local option (this is unbelievably naive), notes that legislation would set the range of possible fees, says this is about local control (but this begs the question about other proposed “local control” proposal to allow municipalities to create their own rent control laws); Nolan suggests motivation for supporting this is so that other municipalities would enact such a tax (again, very naive); McGovern concurs with Nolan, quotes David Kale in asserting that commercial transactions are lion’s share and that some residential exemptions could be made, expresses desire to take in as much revenue as possible; Pickett asks how this relates to existing Home Rule Petition now before the State Legislature, notes that there is already a $4.56/thousand stamp tax by state and that this would be on top of that; JSW uptalks that Legislature could act on our and Somerville’s and Cambridge’s petitions or pass current legislation, deflects by asserting that revenue raised could be used for other purposes; Pickett wants homeowners to gain maximum value in the sale of their greatest financial asset; Wilson offers generalities and suggestion that this might not lead to a tax; Simmons notes that we do use CPA fund for this but characterizes this as a “shortfall” and that (unlimited) more money is needed, notes Envision report and suggests that what we are doing is not enough; Order Adopted 6-2-1 (JP,PT – No; BA Absent)

Order #5. That the City Manager is hereby directed to confer with the City Manager’s Housing Liaison, Community Development Department, and the Cambridge Housing Authority on the feasibility of municipally-funded housing vouchers.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson, Pickett (who offers amendments); Nolan supports order and JP amendments; McGovern asks of motion-makers are OK with the amendments; Wilson supports amendments; both JP amendments adopted 8-0-1; Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council with the data analysis included in the Economic Feasibility Analysis provided to EOHLC as part of Cambridge’s MBTA Communities final compliance submission.   Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; Order Adopted 8-0-1

February 14, 2024

Random Thoughts – February 14, 2024

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Central Square,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 2:23 pm

Random Thoughts – February 14, 2024

In addition to the romanticism of Valentine’s Day, this day also marks the day I moved to the Cambridge/Boston area – 46 years ago. While this means that I can never be a True Cantabrigian, my consolation is that many lifelong Cambridge residents have adopted me as a kind of lost cousin. In fact, my move to Cambridge happened on the first day that buses were running from New York to Boston after the Blizzard of ’78, so it’s always easy for me to remember when I first washed up on the shores of the People’s Republic.RW

I spent a couple of hours yesterday attending a Special City Council meeting called for the purpose of updating the City Council Goals that were most recently updated over 5 years ago in October 2017. It’s likely that the statement of Guiding Principles and City Council Goals will change little, though perhaps they’ll get a bit more specific than the rosy generalities issued in 2017.

I have to say that I have never enjoyed meetings like this where participants stumble about trying to say something relevant that might get the attention of the facilitator. I will add that these exercises often seem more like justifications for keeping “facilitation companies” going than actually producing anything useful. I might say the same thing of most “team building” exercises and virtually all “trainings” – online or in-person. Especially in the context of elected officials who are endlessly competing for credit or attention, the notion that you can train competition into collaboration seems a bit naive. They’ll either do it or they won’t.

That said, there were a few moments of wisdom, reality, and perhaps even redefinition. For example, at least one councillor noted the difference between City Council orders and committee work. This is something I appreciate – over the years I have come to view many policy orders as “drive-by orders” where some random idea is tossed into the public arena or perhaps lifted from some other municipality. Committee work used to be more like a serious detailed discussion that welcomed public participation. That hasn’t really been the case in recent years – unless you are one of the privileged few who function more like “10th councillors” thanks to your affiliation with a lobbying group that also endorses candidates in the municipal election. Everyone else just gets their two or three minutes to make a short statement before being terminated by the Chair. I liked it better when if you actually offered constructive ideas at a committee meeting you might actually be involved in a back-and-forth discussion with the councillors. Nowadays you just perform and exit – unless you are among the politically privileged.

One suggestion made at yesterday’s meeting was that the City Manager and staff should send out weekly general updates of current topics being worked on by City staff. City Manager Yi-An Huang welcomed the idea but also expressed concern about “granularity” as he noted that at any given time there are ~2000 employees working on different things. Was the suggestion to have “weeklies” really be just about getting updates on the usual “hot topics” like bike lanes, BEUDO, and plans for recently-acquired City properties? It was also not made clear if these “weeklies” would be just for councillors or if they would be publicly available. Also unanswered was how such a protocol might mesh with the current daily updates to which many of us are subscribed.

One suggestion was that there should be a 311 system – a single point of contact for resident complaints and inquiries. This brought two things to mind. First, this sounds a lot like SeeClickFix – which is supposed to be the place for residents and elected officials alike to report problems. There seemed to be some sense that this system may not be functioning as well as it should be, and that when there is no response or action the calls go to city councillors. My experience has been that some kinds of SeeClickFix reports get an almost immediate response, and others languish for months or even years. It doesn’t help that some people view SeeClickFix as just another social media outlet on which they can bitch and moan about things that often go well beyond what the City can or should do. The other thing that came to mind was the proposal from over 20 years ago to create an Ombudsman Office that would respond to resident requests. That proposal went down in flames when councillors realized that responding to such complaints was an essential part of their political existence and that transferring that responsibility would only hurt their role in providing “constituent services”. In short, councillors often benefit from the existence of a problem.

Yesterday’s facilitator suggested that city councillors should be asking questions more than making statements. The response from some councillors was that this really doesn’t work in the context of a City Council meeting where you have to wait your turn to be recognized by the Chair and where technically all remarks are made through the Chair. I would note that in committee meetings this kind of questioning and back-and-forth conversation at least used to be common (and useful). It was also pointed out that the Open Meeting Law actually thwarts this kind of questioning and collaboration.

When the facilitators displayed their distillation of apparent City Council priorities (presumably based on some kind of questionnaire), the results were both predictable and misleading. The same can be said of the periodic Resident Surveys conducted on behalf of the City. Affordable housing always tops the list but rarely, if ever, is there any clarification of what that actually means. In one sense, it’s likely that 100% of residents want their housing to be affordable, but does that mean that they want to be able to buy a home on the open market at an affordable price, or does it mean that they want the City to subsidize the purchase? The same goes even more significantly when it comes to renting an apartment. I believe most renters simply want to see more affordable rents, and not necessarily that they want the City to subsidize those rents, but you would never know that from the Resident Survey or from the councillors’ prioritization.

It is worth noting that many, perhaps most, things that residents care about are not directly addressable by city councillors, the City administration, or from any level of government. Kindness, mutual respect, neighborliness, and voluntarism form the glue of society and likely have more to do with the satisfaction of living in a town or city than anything that was ever woven into a City Council policy order.

I was especially impressed when Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan noted that a major portion of City expenditures are in infrastructure, yet there was not even a mention of this in the list of City Council priorities. Perhaps this serves to highlight the difference between the politics of being an elected councillor and the management by City administration. Indeed, one of the greatest problems with a popularly-elected mayor as CEO is that it almost guarantees a greater share of attention and resources toward popular concerns and a corresponding decrease in focus on matters like infrastructure and municipal finance. I hope our current group of councillors keep this in mind as they debate possible Charter changes. It is, in fact, this focus on such matters by City management that allows the elected councillors to focus on more visible populist concerns.

Mayor Simmons bemoaned the fact that DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) was way down on the list of priorities, but stated that “this should be the lens through which we look at things.” It’s certainly one such lens, but fiscal responsibility, effective service delivery, responsiveness, and transparency are also pretty good lenses through which to look at and evaluate what we do as a city.

There was an interesting back-and-forth about the Envision plan and how it is often quoted or ignored depending on what you want or don’t want. There also continues to be a lot of misinterpretation of the goals and metrics in that report – especially in the area of housing.

Regarding Central Square, City Manager Huang stated that many of the goals contained in past studies have already been implemented – noting, in particular, bike lanes and outdoor dining. In fact, there is little mention of bike lanes in these past studies (perhaps due to how long ago the studies were produced), and much of the outdoor dining came about not from past studies but as an emergency response to the Covid epidemic as a means of helping some local businesses to economically survive. Indeed, the only significant new developments in Central Square happened independently of past studies, e.g. the Mass & Main (Normandy/Twining) zoning petition. It is my understanding that some new zoning proposals may be forthcoming based, in part, on some of the considerations of the C2 Study (from over a decade ago), but we’ll have to see where that road leads. – Robert Winters

January 17, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 605-606: January 16, 2024

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,campaign finance,Charter,City Council,cycling,elections,planning,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 9:30 am

Episode 605 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 16, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Jan 16, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Shout out to DPW; OCPF reports due Jan 20; Council committees pending; Clean Slate at Jan 8 Council meeting; Jerry’s Pond; dealing with the nonresident protesters and bad political theater. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 606 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 16, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Jan 16, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Looking back at the 2022-23 City Council term and ahead to the 2024-25 term; single-issue advocacy at the root of the problem, need for cost/benefit analysis – examples with transportation, housing, energy; Charter considerations; phantom Traffic Board; confounded analysis of slate voting; and a Big Wish for better Squares and more fun. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

January 5, 2024

The New City Council Begins to Take Shape – January 8, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Cambridge government,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:05 pm

The New City Council Begins to Take Shape – January 8, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Clean SlateDuring Mayor Simmons’ remarks at the Jan 1 Inaugural meeting, she made reference to beginning the new City Council term with a clean slate. A lot of people feel the same way – including me. It’s almost guaranteed that some bad behavior will follow – especially if some councillors engage in shallow populism – but hopefully there will be enough fortitude to call BS when that needs to be said, and that goes triply if we continue to see the kind of unchallenged displays like we witnessed during the Inaugural meeting.

I was especially pleased to see the City Manager’s communication regarding the eternal backlog of “Awaiting Report” items – most of which really should not have been carried forward to the new City Council term. This is not to say that there are few things worthy of consideration on the list – only that it would be better to set some priorities first. City Council policy orders should not be “Letters to Santa” or “make work projects” for campaign workers occupying patronage positions as City Council Aides.

Here are the notable items in this week’s agenda (in my opinion, of course):

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Orders and Awaiting Reports for the New Term.
pulled by Toner; Rules Suspended 9-0 to bring forward Comm. & Reports #2; Toner says he intends to move to place all Awaiting Report Items on File; Manager explains desire for Council to collaborate and prioritize; McGovern, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Siddiqui, Toner, Nolan, Wilson, Azeem, Pickett, Simmons remarks; Simmons notes need to update City Council Goals which have not changed since 2017, notes difference between goals and policy orders; Toner motion to place Comm & Rpts #2 and all items on Awaiting Report on File Approved 5-4 (BA,MM,JP,PT,DS – Yes; PN,SS,JSW,AW – No); Manager’s Communication #4 referred to Gov’t Operations 9-0

118 Communications (really 121 topics) — The tally is 51 on the proposed (and failed) BEUDO amendment to the amendments; 41 on Zondervan’s order re: police procedures; 22 calling on the City to evict Elbit Systems from Cambridge (mainly from people who don’t live in Cambridge); 4 protesting the City Council’s Nov 20 “Present” vote calling for a ceasefire in Gaza; 2 pro-municipal broadband; 1 anti-municipal broadband; 1 supporting of the Freedmen’s Commission, and 1 regarding traffic on N. Mass. Ave.

I’m highlighting these communications primarily to point out what may well have been the single most stupid idea floated at the last Charter Review Committee meeting – namely a proposal to require a pro/con tally of all public comment and communications to the City Council on various issues. For starters (and this was pointed out by more sensible voices), not every opinion is pro or con. There can be nuanced points of view (like almost all of my points of view). Also, those who are reasonably satisfied with the status quo rarely feel compelled to make public comment. Most public comment these days tends to be reflection of political organizing and often consists of less-than-well-informed diatribes (e.g., the belief that the City Council or the City Administration can evict a commercial tenant (Elbit Systems) associated with a country now in disfavor among the extreme left, or the fascist belief that the Planning Board could support zoning that singles out particular companies). “Direct Democracy” can be very appealing – until you realize that it can be little more than mob rule. I’ll choose representative democracy every time – even when I have concerns about the wisdom or the representativeness of the representatives.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to consult DPW, CDD, IQHQ, Friends of Jerry’s Pond, Alewife Study Group and Mass Audubon about further changes and enhancements to Jerry’s Pond, improvements to the shoreline ecology and other improvements to the current plans for the Rindge Avenue public edge along Jerry’s Pond and investigate funding sources for such plans including the use of City moneys and resources.   Councillor Wilson, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled early by Toner; remarks by Wilson, McGovern, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Toner, Nolan, Pickett, Azeem; Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan, DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins respond; Order Fails 4-5 (MM,SS,JSW,AW – Yes; BA,PN,JP,PT,DS – No)

Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, and Arts and Celebration Committee held a public hearing on Sept 27, 2023 to discuss the future treatment of Jerry’s Pond, specifically the Rindge Avenue edge as it affects the community. The meeting on Sept 27, 2023 was recessed and reconvened on Dec 13, 2023. [text of report]
pulled by Toner (early); Placed on File 9-0

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to consult with relevant staff to consider using remaining ARPA funding to create a tuition relief opportunity with Lesley University for Cambridge employees and residents.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0

Note: The meeting began in the Sullivan Chamber but was disrupted by the same petulant nitwits who disrupted the City Council Inauguration a week earlier. The remainder of the meeting was conducted in Zoom, and all public commenters who insisted on bringing up matters not on the agenda were summarily muted (in accordance with City Council Rules). – Robert Winters

January 2, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 603-604: January 2, 2024

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,Charter,City Council,elections,School Committee — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:02 pm

Episode 603 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 2, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Jan 2, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: City Council and School Committee Inaugural Meetings – entertainment courtesy of PSL (Party for Socialism and Liberation); Mayor Denise Simmons; protests and groupthink; Simmons appointments guaranteed better than predecessor; Charter considerations pending; Resignation of Harvard President Claudine Gay and other Harvard observations; university presidents as fundraisers. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 604 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 2, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Jan 2, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Globe article on Bernie Goldberg, Brookline Lunch; Charter Review Committee – horror of Zoom-only process, nothing binding, strong mayor vs. manager form, bad behavior of CRC member(s), voting age, non-citizen voting, term length, recall provisions, at-large PR elections, citizen assemblies, citizen petitions, citizen initiative petitions, late proposals rejected, policy order vs. “action” orders; some highlights/lowlights of 2022-23 City Council term. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

January 1, 2024

It’s Mayor Simmons – and I couldn’t be happier

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Cambridge government,City Council — Robert Winters @ 1:04 pm

It’s Mayor Simmons – and I couldn’t be happier

January 1, 2024 – E. Denise Simmons was elected Mayor at today’s Inaugural Meeting of the 2024-2025 Cambridge City Council. The vote was (eventually) unanimous. Marc McGovern was then elected Vice-Chair by an 8-1 majority.

For what it’s worth, control freaks should never be chosen as Mayor, so this was a good outcome.

Councillor Vote for Mayor (1st Ballot) Vote for Mayor (2nd Ballot) Vote for Vice-Chair
Burhan Azeem McGovern → Azeem (2) Simmons Azeem → McGovern (3)
Marc McGovern McGovern → Simmons (1) Simmons McGovern
Patricia Nolan Nolan Nolan → Simmons Nolan
Joan Pickett Simmons Simmons Nolan → McGovern (1)
Sumbul Siddiqui Siddiqui Simmons Wilson → McGovern (6)
E. Denise Simmons Simmons Simmons McGovern
Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler Siddiqui Simmons Wilson → McGovern (4)
Paul Toner Simmons Simmons Nolan → McGovern (2)
Ayesha Wilson Siddiqui Simmons Wilson → McGovern (5)
Result: Simmons 4, Siddiqui 3, Nolan 1, Azeem 1 Simmons unanimous McGovern 8, Nolan 1

The meeting was disrupted by the morons from the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) and their allies chanting tired refrains such as “Justice for Faisal”, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, and accusations that most of the Cambridge City Council support genocide. Methinks PSL would be more appropriately named “Petulant Socialist Lunatics”. They also defaced the front stairs of City Hall with their various predictable catchphrases. Unless steps are taken to regulate the “time, place, and manner” of what they feel are their free speech rights, these lunatics will be back again and again and again, and Cambridge will be seen broadly as a sanctuary city for idiots. – Robert Winters

December 16, 2023

Hoping for Something Better – December 18, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Charter,City Council,Deaths — Tags: , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:40 pm

Hoping for Something Better – December 18, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

That's All Folks!This is the last meeting of the 2022-23 Cambridge City Council, and I really hope the next group of nine will find the road back to reasonable. I have had my fill of councillors engaging in political patronage, calling cops murderers, enacting mandates without expending effort to convince people, and backroom political machinations held under the guise of “ad-hoc” committees created to evade the primary purposes of the Open Meeting Law. We can do better. Maybe the new City Council can even find that “Third Way” on matters involving bikes, housing, and other matters rather than playing “winner take all” every which way. The Big Elephant in the room next year will be deliberations on revisions to the City Charter, and it’s not yet clear if rationality will prevail over political self-interest in that process. I have refrained from commenting so far on that upcoming pachyderm, but that will end soon and I intend to be brutally honest in my assessment.

The out-of-sight battle for who shall be Mayor is, of course, raging and my understanding is that all six incumbents are seeking the crown. I have a couple of favorites, of course, but as Werner Heisenberg taught us, the act of measurement can only introduce uncertainty into what is being measured, so I’ll shut up for now and hope for the best. I’ll also refrain from comments on the three departing councillors thanks to some sage advice that my mother gave me a very long time ago.

It’s a light agenda for this sunset meeting, but here are a few items of potential interest:

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Final Landmark Designation Report for Miss Markham’s School at 10 Buckingham Street on the Buckingham, Browne & Nichols (BB&N) Lower School campus. (CM23#303) [text of report]
pulled by McGovern; remarks by MM (dismissive of landmarking of building “I don’t know what we’re preserving.”), Charles Sullivan (who explains the historical and architectural significance), McGovern would prefer a plaque rather than landmarking; PN will not support landmarking – OK with a plaque; DC supports landmarking, would prefer to see original portion of building preserved, possibly moved, and new building built in addition, Sullivan concurs; DS supports landmarking, wants efforts to be expended to preserve, Sullivan notes that other than landmarking no other options; QZ sees no value in preserving this building; Siddiqui also does not support landmarking; Order Fails of Adoption 2-6-1 (DC,DS-Yes; AM,MM,PN,PT,QZ,SS-No; BA-Absent); Placed on File 8-0-1 (BA-Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 23-82, regarding an update on Municipal Broadband and Digital Equity. (CM23#307) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; remarks by PN, wants timeline; Yi-An Huang notes pairing of Digital Equity and Municipal Broadband and fact that some improvements in digital equity can be done at modest cost (not $200 million), City-owned fiber network would have some policy advantages, substantial amount of City subsidy would be required and must be balanced against other priorities, whether or not it should be part of 5-year plan, need to find the money first; Nolan harps on “this is a utility” and apparently believes Harvard, MIT, and “Kendall Square” would provide financial support (really?); QZ tells story of broadband access in Suriname, would raise taxes to pay for this; Placed on File 8-0-1 (BA-Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $68,000, from Free Cash to the General Fund City Council Other Ordinary Maintenance account to support the work of the Charter Review Committee. Funds will be used to support the work of the Charter Review Committee which has been meeting since August 2022 and is tasked to review the City’s current charter and to recommend changes. These efforts included contracting with an outside consultant to assist with research and facilitation of committee meetings, as well as public outreach events and materials. The Committee is anticipated to release a final report by Jan 31, 2024. (CM23#308)
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (BA-Absent)

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Cambridge Police Department to fundamentally change how it responds to situations that could lead to violence and death. [Charter Right – Zondervan, Dec 11, 2023] (PO23#215)
pulled by Zondervan; QZ asks about killing of Faisal; Christine Elow notes work with PERF, working with police union on body cameras and policies, released dashboard, after-inquest review by PERF, work on less-lethal options and other launchers, training of entire department; QZ asks about what policies are being negotiated with union; QZ asks about arms that police carry, possibility of response without firearms; Elow notes that Comm. Bard agreed with reduction of weaponry, 20% of inventory was destroyed, camouflage eliminated; QZ asks about long guns on roofs at protest last week; Elow explains that at large events best practices requires rooftop observations, knew of Elbit protest in advance and possibility of counterprotest, Special Response Team on roof, concerns about harm and vandalism; preparation for worst-case scenarios; QZ continues to harp on presence of rifles on roof; Siddiqui asks about policy vs. practice re: presence of rifles with Special Response Team; Elow notes what has happened elsewhere in country and need to be prepared; PN notes that Public Safety meeting was not held due to lack of quorum, but originally scheduled for Dec 6, then changed to Dec 13 when members could not attend; PN gives prepared speech on inquest and process; Nolan proposes amendments to Zondervan order; MM notes that officers on roof were not “snipers” (Elow concurs) and that preparedness for worst-case scenarios is necessary; DS notes diversity of opinion and that “you’re entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts”, notes that seniors want public safety and that they don’t want Police Department neutered, not like police departments elsewhere; DS cautions against neutering of CPD possibly leading to tragic outcomes, cannot support original order or amended order; Elow notes that Special Response Team formed under Comm. Robert Haas as an alternative to State Police or other law enforcement agencies, only used for special circumstances; Yi-An Huang notes that this conversation has been ongoing all year, notes that PERF generally only brought in when terrible things have happened elsewhere, notes that Faisal incident was a complicated situation that unfolded fast, notes that our police officers need to be supported; Toner will vote no because we are already making good progress; Carlone notes that we have done this already and that if we must pass an Order it should be the amended version; QZ says we have not dealt with this issue in the current term; Elow notes that CPD looks at every incident differently; Nolan notes that we have done some of this before, does not support disarming the Police, notes that Elbit protests here and elsewhere had escalated; Siddiqui will support substitute order, need for further conversation; Amendment by Substitution Passes 8-1 (QZ-No); Order as Amended Passes 5-4 (BA,DC,PN,QZ,SS-Yes; AM,MM,DS,PT-No); Amended Order forwarded to next City Council (Awaiting Report)

Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance 2023 #12 has been received from City Clerk, relative to BEUDO the Municipal Code of the City of Cambridge be amended in Chapter 8.67.100 entitled “Emission Reduction Requirements”. [Passed to 2nd Reading Dec 4, 2023; Eligible to be ordained on or after Dec 18, 2023] (ORD23#12)
pulled by Zondervan; Iram Farooq notes that CDD does not support this further amendment, notes that current ordinance reduces by 90% but exorbitant costs for minimal additional reduction and other problematic aspects of amendment, notes that CDD came up with most stringent ordinance possible and this was already adopted and that further amendment now would be a breach of trust; Zondervan notes that his latest proposed amendments addresses these concerns; Farooq says no fuel now available to meet proposed specifications and that only natural gas would currently suffice and with higher carbon cost – nothing gained with added regulatory structure; McGovern notes Council actions over past few months in this area, not supportive of amendments; Nolan says even if not a good idea to amend so soon this was our expectation under new stretch code, says it’s possible to meet needs on extreme cold days, says we won’t meet state mandated goals on emission reduction; Carlone says this is doable, “I’ll be voting for children”; Ordination Fails 4-5 (DC,PN,QZ,SS-Yes; BA,AM,MM,PT,DS-No)

Resolution #1. Resolution on the death of Paul Parravano.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui
pulled early by Councillor Simmons; remarks by DS,MM,PT,AM,DC,PN,QZ,SS; Adopted 8-0-1 (BA-Absent)

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to coordinate with MIT to establish a suitable memorial in Cambridge in honor of Paul Parravano.   Councillor Simmons (PO23#218)
pulled by Simmons; Order Adopted 9-0

Resolution #2. Resolution on the death of Roderick L. Jackson.   Councillor Simmons, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern
Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (QZ-Absent)

Resolution #4. Congratulations to Clifford Cook on his retirement from the City of Cambridge.   Councillor Toner

Resolution #6. Thanks to Alanna Mallon for her service to the citizens of Cambridge.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern

Resolution #7. Thanks to Quinton Zondervan for his service to the citizens of Cambridge.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Nolan, Councillor McGovern

Resolution #8. Thanks to Dennis Carlone for his service to the citizens of Cambridge.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner

Committee Report #4. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Nov 29, 2023 to discuss a Zoning Petition by Allene R. Pierson et al. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #6. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Dec 6, 2023 to discuss potential changes to the Cambridge Municipal Code, Chapter 12.22 Cycling Safety Ordinance. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #4. A communication was received from Councillor Marc McGovern, relative to discharging the Cycling Safety Ordinance matter from Committee and moving it forward. to the next Council Ordinance Committee. (COF23#239)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #7. The Health and Environment Committee and the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee held a joint meeting on Dec 6, 2023 to discuss PO23#147 (options for amending parking fees and regulations throughout the City in order to further support the City’s goals of low carbon travel). [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #8. The Finance Committee held a public hearing on Dec 12, 2023 to receive an update and have discussion on Public Investment Planning. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Cleaning Out the Closet

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Councillor Azeem, transmitting an update regarding matters in the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee [Implementing ways to enforce the anti-idling law. (PO22#55 of Apr 25, 2022)]. (COF23#236)
pulled by Azeem; Discharged from Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0; Forward to next Council’s Committee 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from Councillor Simmons re Motion to Discharge Committee Items Councillor Simmons. (COF23#238) [text of report]
pulled by Simmons; Matters Discharged from Civic Unity and Housing Committees 9-0; Forward to next Council’s Committee 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #5. A communication was received from Diane LeBlanc, City Clerk, transmitting, in accordance with POR 2023 #216, adopted Dec 11, 2023, recommendation that City Council take an affirmative vote to carry over pending Awaiting Reports to the next City Council. (COF23#240) [text of report]
Forward subset of Awaiting Report List to next City Council, including Policy Order of Charter Right #1; Adopted 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress