Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 19, 2012

Getting Down to Business – Mar 19, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,City Council,Kendall Square — Tags: , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:12 am

Getting Down to Business – Mar 19, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

There can be little doubt that this meeting is the most serious meeting so far this year and possibly for this entire year. Front and center on the agenda is City Council Order #7, cosponsored by seven of the nine city councillors, calling for an extension of the City Manager’s contract (through mid-2013) and a commitment to begin consideration of how the process of succession might be conducted should this be the final contract extension for City Manager Robert W. Healy. There has been no recent public statement from Mr. Healy regarding his wishes for any additional contract extension, but a short-term extension like the one proposed seems consistent with statements made in recent years. It is noteworthy that seven of the nine city councillors had the good sense to grant a contract extension. The two councillors who did not sign on to this Order are Councillor Kelley (who has been a vocal opponent of Mr. Healy since long before his time as a councillor) and Councillor Reeves (speculation encouraged).
[Update: City Manager Robert Healy has now stated that he will retire at the end of this extended contract – in mid-2013.]
The relevant Order is this:

O-7     Mar 19, 2012
COUNCILLOR MAHER, COUNCILLOR CHEUNG, COUNCILLOR DECKER, VICE MAYOR SIMMONS, COUNCILLOR TOOMEY, MAYOR DAVIS, COUNCILLOR VANBEUZEKOM
WHEREAS: City Manager Robert Healy’s current employment contract with the City of Cambridge expires on Sept 30, 2012; and
WHEREAS: The contract contains a notification provision which needs action by the City Council or Mr. Healy on or before Mar 31, 2012; and
WHEREAS: As a result of Mr. Healy’s long tenure as City Manager, the City of Cambridge has not undertaken a search for a new City Manager for over thirty years; and
WHEREAS: It is imperative to the overall stability of the City of Cambridge that the City Council develop both a comprehensive short-term and long-term succession plan that will assist the City Council in their ongoing goal of providing fiscal stability and thoughtful strategic planning and any short-term plan should be in place before the FY 2014 budget process begins; now therefore be it
ORDERED: That the City Council amends the expiration date of the City Manager’s current employment contract to June 30, 2013 which coincides with the fiscal FY 2013 year-end; and be it further
ORDERED: That all other provisions of the employment contract remain unchanged; and be it further
ORDERED: That the City Council’s Government Operations and Rules Committee, with the assistance of the City Manager, begin the process of developing comprehensive short-term and long-term succession plans. Such plans shall include timelines and outline opportunities for input from the community including residents, businesses, institutions and City staff. Once developed, such plans shall be presented to the full City Council for final consideration.

Regardless whether any addition contract extensions occur in the future, there is wisdom in this City Council developing some kind of vision of how the City will one day, perhaps next year, make the difficult transition to a new City Manager after three decades of extraordinarily competent leadership. Let’s just hope that when the time comes this City Council or a future City Council is up to the task.

Elsewhere on the agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the block rates for water consumption and sewer use for the period beginning Apr 1, 2012 and ending Mar 31, 2013.

The proposal is that the water and sewer rates remain unchanged for the coming year – the 2nd consecutive year of 0% increases. The future may not be as bright with projected water rate increases in the coming few years of 1.1%, 0.2%, 1.3%, and 2.0% but more significant projected sewer rate increases of 5.8%, 9.1%, 6.0%, and 10.2%. Sewer costs are currently about 72% of a typical water/sewer bill, so escalating sewer rates will have a significant impact down the road even as the water rates remain relatively stable.

On The Table #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a request from Boston Properties Limited Partnership ("Boston Properties") for the modification of two existing open space restriction covenants on buildings located at Four and Five Cambridge Center in connection with the creation of a new 47,000 square foot urban park and new open space restriction covenant for a net gain 28,853 square feet of public open space.

The proposal introduced several weeks ago by Boston Properties (to reduce the rooftop garden on the Kendall Square garage in exchange for greatly extending the agreement to maintain the garden and landscaping additional open space in the Kendall Square MXD District) was Tabled in order to allow more time for public process and, presumably, negotiation. Much of the public comment to date has been resoundingly negative, and there has been at least one proposal (from the East Cambridge Planning Team) to link any changes to the existing rooftop park to the provision of comparable space on adjacent buildings and a commitment to build the housing mandated by zoning guidelines. There are efforts to lure prize tenant Google away from Cambridge should this matter be long delayed, so there is some pressure on the City Council to resolve this soon and, hopefully, amicably for all affected parties.

Communications #3-32 and #36-111. A barrage of computer-generated petitions regarding the proposed reconfiguration of Community Schools programs associated with the temporary relocation of the King School and the programs housed therein.

It took me all of about a week to grow tired of the computer-generated communications that these "change.org" petitions produce – all identical lemming-like statements of dissatisfaction over whatever the flavor-of-the-week gripe happens to be. There are aspects of the proposed Community Schools reconfiguration worthy of discussion, but advocacy by the pound is thoroughly unappealing. Several well-considered letters from a few thoughtful individuals carry so much more weight than 76 sheep clicking "send" on a petition-generating website.

Much more entertaining are the following communications from the Odd Wizard of Franklin Street.

Communication #34. A communication was received from Peter Valentine regarding activity throughout the nation and territories where the national interests are involved.

Peter urges the following: To all True Americans from Peter Valentine, National Officer In Charge under the authority of a Constitutional State of "Imminent Danger That Will Not Admit Delay" 37 Brookline St., 3/9/2012. Orders that all governments in the United States of America be it Town, City, State or National implement a Department of Constitutional monitoring, investigation and corrective action to whatever degree necessary pertaining to any rights violations that a citizen believes a government may have perpetuated against a citizens’ constitutional rights. And further to all True Americans be it known that the National Officer In Charge is aware of all subversive activity throughout the nation and territories where the national interests are involved whether it be enemies who have infiltrated the government, the security forces or to undermine the security and well being of society in general. As Above, So Below. The term True American does not have to be defined because if you are a True American, You have The intelligence to Know What It Means.

Communication #113. A communication was received from Peter Valentine regarding the way to end all the world’s problems is for everyone to become creative instead of average and or despotic.

Peter urges the following: To all True Americans from The National Officer In Charge, under the authority of a "Constitutional State of Imminent Danger That Will Not Admit Delay", citizen Peter Valentine, 37 Brookline St. 3/11/2012. The Officer In Charge sends the Directive forward that the way to end all the world’s problems if for everyone to become Creative instead of Average and or Despotic.

Resolution #1. Retirement of Darleen G. Bonislawski from the Election Commission.   Mayor Davis

Darleen Bonislawski has served honorably as an Election Commissioner since 1988 (24 years). As one of the few residents who ever goes to meetings of the Election Commission, I’ll note that Darleen has been the most outspoken commissioner advocating for members of under-represented communities to register and to vote. Her successor must be appointed by April 1 from a list of three persons nominated by the Cambridge Democratic City Committee. Two of those nominees, Tom Stohlman and Larry Ward, are superb choices – either of whom would be an excellent choice to succeed Darleen.

Order #3. That the City Manager, in conjunction with the Community Development Department, is requested to investigate the improper leases and rental of owned affordable housing units.   Councillor Reeves

What a revelation. It’s somewhat reminiscent of the days of rent control when property owners were constrained in what they could legally charge for rent, but many tenants were earning great money (including a former mayor) and other tenants were subletting their rent-controlled apartments for substantially more than the maximum legal rent. I guess it just goes to show that we’re all good capitalists at heart. That includes many people in subsidized housing who are expert at being "poor on paper" in order to qualify for taxpayer-supported cheap housing, and apparently a few ultra-capitalists who are now using their taxpayer-supported housing as a tradable commodity. All Hail Marx and Lenin here in the Peoples Republic!

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Information Technology Department and the Government Operations and Rules Committee to look into the feasibility of recording all roll call votes online and report back to the Cambridge City Council.   Councillor Cheung

As the ultimate Council observer, I endorse this wholeheartedly. It does, however, seem rather odd that the City is so enslaved and choked by its own technology that the IT Department is required when all that is needed is a simple annotation indicating how people voted. This is already done for some items voted by the City Council. – Robert Winters

March 5, 2012

Cambridge City Council subcommittees for 2012-2013

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 8:49 pm

City Council subcommittees for 2012-2013

Committee Members Staff
Ordinance Maher (Chair), (committee of the whole) Lopez, Crane
Finance Decker (chair), (committee of the whole) Lopez, Crane
Government Operations and Rules Maher (Chair), Cheung, Simmons, Toomey, vanBeuzekom Lopez
Transportation, Traffic, and Parking vanBeuzekom (Chair), Decker, Simmons Lopez
Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Cheung (Chair), Reeves, vanBeuzekom Lopez
Housing Decker (Chair), Kelley, Reeves Lopez
Economic Development, Training, and Employment Toomey (Chair), Cheung, Reeves Lopez
Public Safety Kelley (Chair), Simmons, Toomey Lopez
Human Services Simmons (Chair), Kelley, Reeves Lopez
Public Facilities, Art, and Celebrations Reeves (Chair), Cheung, Maher Crane
Cable TV, Telecommunications, and Public Utilities Cheung (Chair), Decker, vanBeuzekom Crane
Veterans Kelley (Chair), Decker, Toomey Crane
Claims Toomey (Chair), Maher, Simmons Cosgrove
University Relations Reeves (Chair), Maher, vanBeuzekom Lopez
Community Health Decker (Chair), Toomey, vanBeuzekom Crane
Environment vanBeuzekom (Chair), Cheung, Kelley Crane
Civic Unity Simmons (Chair), Maher, Kelley Crane

Parks, Petitions, and Pickups – March 5, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,Kendall Square — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 2:18 am

Parks, Petitions, and Pickups – Mar 5, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

The proposal introduced last week by Boston Properties (to reduce the rooftop garden on the Kendall Square garage in exchange for greatly extending the agreement to maintain the garden and landscaping additional open space in the Kendall Square MXD District) elicited a great deal of public comment (almost all opposed to reducing the size of the garden) and a renewed interest by city councillors in the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority that guides the development of the MXD District and much of the Kendall Square area. It was agreed that the matter should be tabled until March 19 so that some public process and additional conversations might take place. The relevant agenda item is this:

On The Table #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to a request from Boston Properties Limited Partnership ("Boston Properties") for the modification of two existing open space restriction covenants on buildings located at Four and Five Cambridge Center in connection with the creation of a new 47,000 square foot urban park and new open space restriction covenant for a net gain 28,853 square feet of public open space. [Placed on Table on motion of Councillor Toomey on Feb 27, 2011.]

One response is the following Order from Councillor Toomey that questions what constitutes open space in that area and whether the area to be landscaped as a "Dog and People Park" has not already been designated for other use.

Order #2. That the City Manager is request to report back to the City Council on what is designated open space within the MXD District in Kendall Square.   Councillor Toomey

Some of the discussion by councillors at last week’s meeting focused on the membership of the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority (CRA). Though this Board is supposed to have an executive director and five members (four appointed by the City Manager subject to approval by the City Council, and one appointed by the governor), most of the seats have remained essentially or actually vacant for some time. The City Manager last week let it be known that he is now interviewing possible new appointees for this Board. It is not unreasonable to speculate that a renewed CRA could play a role in projects not only in the Kendall Square area but also elsewhere in Cambridge (as it has in the long past).

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to look into the feasibility of hiring an ombudsman to serve as a liaison and internal advocate for community members. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Decker on Order Number One of Feb 27, 2012.]

This was Councillors Cheung and vanBeuzekom’s Order last week – a good sentiment but perhaps not the best response to perceptions by some that the Community Development Department (CDD) is not working in the best interest of the residents of the city. As mentioned here last week, everyone at CDD should be and for the most part is already "a liason and internal advocate for community members".

Unfinished Business #3. A communication was received from D. Margaret Drury, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Seidel, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a hearing held on December 28, 2011 to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance on the petition filed by Julia Bishop, et al. and re-filed by the City Council to amend Section 17.20 of the Zoning Ordinance – Regulations for Special District 2 located in North Cambridge along Linear Park.

It is expected that this Petition which was amended last week and which has been the focus of so much public testimony and organizing since last summer will be voted this week. The Law Department is expected to address issues of possible spot zoning prior to the Council vote on ordination.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Commissioner of Public Works with the intention of devising a plan for implementing curbside pick up for small businesses along existing curbside pick up routes and to report back to the City Council.   Councillor Toomey

There was a day not so long ago when the City picked up rubbish from many or most Cambridge businesses, but the policy has for some time been to shift this responsibility from the City to private vendors hired by the businesses or commercial building owners. This same policy has carried over to recycling services. Councillor Toomey’s well-intentioned Order should be understood in the larger context of all solid waste disposal by businesses. For example, if recycling services are provided at low or no cost to small businesses, then this would create a financial incentive for businesses to recycle as much as possible. [This has been the experience in cities and towns with "pay as you throw" systems in which residents can recycle at no cost but must pay by the bag or barrel for rubbish disposal.] This could substantially increase costs for the City. There certainly would be greater efficiency in using the same vehicles for both residential and commercial recycling, but contracts would have to be rewritten and volumes and costs estimated before considering a shift back toward the City providing these services.

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to provide to the City Council the response to the Massachusetts Food Association’s letter as it relates to City Council Policy Order Number 10 regarding banning of plastic bag usage by Cambridge retailers.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

It will be interesting to see both the Massachusetts Food Association’s letter opposing such a ban as well as the City Manager’s response. Consumers should be routinely providing their own bags without government intervention, but whether they do or don’t it would still make more sense to have a common policy at all stores and not different policies in different cities and towns.

Finally, it must be noted that this will be the first City Council meeting since the retirement of City Clerk D. Margaret Drury. Interim City Clerk Donna Lopez was sworn in at last week’s meeting. The complete list of Cambridge Town Clerks and City Clerks going back to 1632 is posted at http://rwinters.com/clerks-managers.htm. – Robert Winters

February 26, 2012

To Halve and Halve Not – Feb 27, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,Kendall Square,MBTA — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 2:28 pm

To Halve and Halve Not – Feb 27, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Now that Cambridge has a Mayor, all things are now possible – world peace, affordable space travel, and eternal life – just to name a few. Regarding more mundane affairs, perhaps Mayor Davis will set a new standard by appointing the City Council committees in record time. I hope so – I have a rocket to catch.

The Really Big Item on the agenda this week seems to be City Manager’s Agenda #1 – a recommendation that the City Council approve a plan submitted by Boston Properties to cut in half the rooftop garden that exists in Kendall Square between Cambridge Center Buildings Four and Five. If you haven’t yet visited that garden, you should. You can get to it via the Marriott. It’s an unexpected oasis nestled among the taller buildings in Kendall Square perhaps 70 feet above ground. Apparently the playful folks at Google want to connect their rented spaces in two adjacent buildings by constructing a connector that will consume half of the rooftop garden – the sunnier half, by the way. And wouldn’t you know it – if they can’t do this they’ll have to move and Cambridge will lose the jobs, the prestige, the taxes, and the firstborn males of its residents. Search engines will cease to function and the Charles River will turn to blood.

The proposal asks that the Ancient Covenants mandating the rooftop park be modified in exchange for landscaping a narrow, triangular piece of land at the bend of Binney Street abutting the railroad tracks for use as a "Dog and People Park". Methinks there’s room to negotiate for something better. It’s also a bit strange to have proposals like this come forward while the K2C2 (Kendall Square/Central Square) planning process involving the Goody/Clancy firm is ongoing. The Manager’s recommendation calls for diminution of process and a quick decision. The Council shouldn’t needlessly delay, but it’s doubtful that a few more weeks of consideration will cause Google to move to Ashtabula. [Read the full proposal (9.5MB)]

It’s an interesting juxtaposition that Manager’s Agenda #8 is also on the agenda. This is an appropriation of $1,000,000 received from Alexandria Real Estate (ARE) that will be used to enable the City to plan and design improvements at the Rogers Street Park and the Triangle Park while ascertaining the appropriate open space needs of eastern Cambridge.

Elsewhere on the agenda, Councillor Kelley filed for Reconsideration of his failed Feb 13 Order that asks the City Manager "to direct City staff to replace the words ‘approve’ and ‘disapprove’ with the words ‘support’ and ‘do not support’ or, as appropriate, by some other terms that will help clarify where relevant authority rests when considering curb cuts." The Order failed with only Councillors Kelley, Decker, and vanBeuzekom supporting it. Or maybe approving it. Never mind. This is also the subject of Charter Right #2 that would refer the matter to the Gov’t Operations & Rules Committee which may or may not ultimately approve or support it or possibly not approve or not support it.

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-23, regarding the continuation of the Longfellow Community School program and Longfellow Neighborhood Council.

The Manager proposes that starting this fall when the King/Amigos building closes for renovations that the Community School currently operating in the King/Amigos building will move to the Amigos Building (on Upton Street) where the majority of its program participants will attend school. The Community School operating in the Longfellow neighborhood will provide programming to the King School and neighborhood children in the Longfellow building. With the reopening of the Longfellow Building this summer, the program will be able to offer robust programming in the building for children who attend the King
School or come from the neighborhood. In addition, the Longfellow Community School will be able to continue to provide community programming for the Longfellow neighborhood. The City will contract with the Cambridge Community Center, located around the corner from the King School, to provide community support until the King School reopens. All in all, this seems like a good solution for each of the affected schools and neighborhoods.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to look into the feasibility of hiring an ombudsman to serve as a liaison and internal advocate for community members.   Councillor Cheung and Councillor vanBeuzekom

This brings to mind a time when the Cambridge Police Department had a separate Community Oriented Policing liasson. When Ronnie Watson took over as Police Commission one of the first things he did was to eliminate this position. His argument was that the entire department should be doing Community Oriented Policing as a matter of policy. This same argument can be made regarding the Community Development Department. Is the genesis of this Order the perception that CDD is not doing "community oriented" planning and development? Are existing staff not effectively mediating between the City’s need to grow the tax base, the needs of property owners/developers, and the needs of residents? If this is not the case, then hiring an additional "liaison and internal advocate for community members" will solve nothing. My personal experience with CDD has generally been very good, though I do sometimes feel that the economic development staff don’t understand the need to keep neighbors in the loop. Everyone at CDD should be acting as community liassons. Most of them already do.

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to provide the City Council with a written annual report for the Parking and Transportation Demand Management (PTDM) Ordinance within four weeks time.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

The PTDM Ordinance was developed as a replacement for the Interim Parking Freeze that was part of a settlement over alleged violations of earlier agreements relating to the Clean Air Act. Quite a few consequences grew out of that settlement and subsequent ordinances – dedicated bike lanes, required traffic impact studies, mandatory PTDM plans for new developments, unregulated parking spaces transformed to metered or otherwise regulated parking, etc. These things have become almost a matter of religion without periodically assessing their need or impact. Things do change. When the price of gasoline exceeds $5 or more, things will change even more and the City’s ordinances should not remain stuck in time. Periodic reports, assessments, and possible modifications should be the rule and not the exception. Good Order, Minka.

Order #4. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to appoint a local MBTA Advisory Council of CDD staff and residents to meet regularly and assess MBTA funding, programming and service cuts and report back to the City Council.   Councillor Decker

This is another good Order, though it brings to mind a curiosity in the way City departments are currently structured. The Transporation Planning staff is now part of the Community Development Department (CDD), though one might wonder why it’s not part of the Traffic, Parking, & Transportation Department (TPT). In other cities, you might expect to see parks and open space planning integrated into the public works department, but in Cambridge it’s part of CDD. Community Schoools are staffed through the Human Services and not by the School Department. MBTA services affect Cambridge residents in many ways and it’s appropriate that there should be more than just ad hoc gatherings when a crisis arises. Whether this should be staffed by CDD or by the Transportation, Traffic & Parking Dept. is worth considering. The fact that CDD produced a great document regarding the proposed MBTA fare increases and service cuts for last week’s Special Meeting is a point in their favor, but I can’t help but think that we’d all benefit from having the focus of TPT shift away from tickets and fundraising toward a broader view of all transportation.

It must also be noted that this will be the last City Council meeting for retiring City Clerk D. Margaret Drury. She has been an invaluable asset to every city councillor with whom she has served since her appointment in 1992. – Robert Winters

February 22, 2012

A Very Special Cambridge City Council Meeting – Feb 22, 2012

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,MBTA — Tags: , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:20 pm

A Very Special Cambridge City Council Meeting – Feb 22, 2012
It’s Mayor Henrietta Davis and Vice Mayor Denise Simmons

Tonight The Nine shall meet to gather information and public testimony on the effects on Cambridge of the proposed MBTA cuts and fare increases and to develop a policy statement in preparation for the Feb 29 MBTA public hearing at the Senior Center City Hall. It is also expected that one or more additional mayoral ballots will take place at some point in the meeting. Perhaps MBTA also stands for "mayoral balloting tried again".

Today’s date coincides with the date two years ago when the previous mayoral impasse was broken and David Maher was elected mayor. Though I don’t recall the date in 1996 when Sheila Russell was finally elected mayor, I believe that impasse lasted longer. Since then, the dates were Jan 26, 1998 (Duehay, 3rd ballot), Feb 15, 2000 (Galluccio, 5th ballot), Jan 7, 2002 (Sullivan, 1st ballot), Jan 5, 2004 (Sullivan, 1st ballot), Jan 2, 2006 (Reeves, 1st ballot), Jan 14, 2008 (Simmons, 2nd ballot), and Feb 22, 2010 (Maher, 6th ballot). If this history is any indication, there’s a good chance this wuill be resolved tonight or at next Monday’s regular meeting. The 1948 mayoral marathon required 1,321 ballots before Michael J. Neville was elected mayor in late April.

It seems as though everyone who pays attention to the mayoral balloting has their own theory about what should happen or what might happen. I have my own theories as well. In fact, I have written out a scenario of how I believe this thing will ultimately play out. In the spirit of Werner Heisenberg, I won’t yet reveal my theory lest it influence the experiment. It will be revealed in 39 days. Hopefully, The Nine will have decided on The One by then. In the meantime, any mayoral ballots will be recorded at http://cambridgecivic.com/?p=1750.

The real substance of this meeting are the proposed MBTA fare increases and service cuts. It’s not clear how much leverage the Cambridge City Council or the City of Cambridge has in this, but some kind of coherent response is needed. A major focus in Cambridge over the last decade or so has been on transit-oriented development and shifting away from dependence on automobiles. It would be a major setback to have this derailed by disincentives to public transit use, especially when calculations indicate that increases in efficiency and a very modest increase in the gasoline tax could resolve this. The state legislature also has an obligation to unburden the MBTA of the debt caused by mitigation costs related to The Big Dig. However this is ultimately resolved, it’s important that future MBTA financing be primarily self-sustaining so that we won’t be faced with similar threats every few years. – Robert Winters

February 18, 2012

Cambridge Mayoral Vote – 2012

Filed under: Cambridge government,City Council,elections — Tags: , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:50 am

The 1st Ballot for Cambridge Mayor took place at the Inaugural Meeting on January 2, 2012. The 2nd Ballot took place at the January 9 meeting and again no mayor was elected. The 3rd ballot took place at the end of the January 23 meeting with the vote identical to the previous vote.

At the January 30 meeting, there were three mayoral ballots.

One mayoral ballot took place at each of the February 6 and February 13 meetings.

A Special Meeting has been called for Wed, February 22 for the dual purposes of additional balloting for mayor and to discuss possible policy statements relative to the proposed fare increases and service reductions by the MBTA. It is not known which purpose will be taken up first or whether mayoral votes might take place at different points of this meeting.

If and when a Mayor is elected, the City Council will then proceed to the vote for Vice-Chair of the City Council (commonly referred to as Vice Mayor).

It is worth noting that in 1948 the Cambridge City Council required 1,321 ballots before electing Michael J. Neville as Mayor.

CouncillorBallot #1
(Jan 2)		Ballot #2
(Jan 9)		Ballot #3
(Jan 23)		Ballot #4
(Jan 30)		Ballot #5
(Jan 30)		Ballot #6
(Jan 30)		Ballot #7
(Feb 6)		Ballot #8
(Feb 13)		Ballot #9
(Feb 22)		Ballot #10
(Feb 22)		Vice-Mayor Ballot #1
CheungCheung (2)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (3)Cheung (2)Cheung to Davis [4]
unanimous		Cheung to Simmons
unanimous
DavisDavis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (1)Davis (2)DavisSimmons
DeckerDecker (2)Decker (3)Decker (3)Decker (3)Decker (2)Decker (2)Decker (2)Decker (2)Decker (2)Decker to Davis [1]Simmons
KelleyKelley (1)Kelley (1)Kelley (1)Kelley (1)Reeves (2)Reeves (2)ABSENTKelley (2)Kelley (2)Kelley to Davis [3]Simmons
MaherMaher (2)DeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerDavisSimmons
ReevesDeckerDeckerDeckerDeckerReevesReevesReeves (1)KelleyKelleyKelley to Davis [2]Simmons
SimmonsSimmons (1)CheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungDavisDavisSimmons
ToomeyMaherToomey (1)Toomey (1)Toomey (1)Toomey (1)Toomey (1)Maher (1)Maher (1)Maher (1)DavisSimmons
vanBeuzekomCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungCheungDavisSimmons

February 12, 2012

The Nine Mayor Problem – Feb 13, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,cycling — Tags: , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:29 pm

The Nine Mayor Problem – Feb 13, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

The City Council took its 7th Mayoral Ballot last week even though one of the councillors (Kelley) was absent. It’s really getting ridiculous at this point, and maybe the councillors will soon realize that the choice has nothing to do with substance or leadership and everything to do with personal ego and aspiration. If common sense miraculously prevails, perhaps they’ll settle on a compromise [Hey, weren’t all of you satisfied with how David Maher handled the job last term?] and move on to the appointment of City Council committees, the business of representing the citizens, and just doing their job. Now there’s a concept! In the meantime, let’s refer to all nine of them as "Mayor" just to neutralize the false sense of importance.

It’s pretty much certain that there will be one or more mayoral ballots taken at this meeting. Hopefully they’ll settle this early in the meeting and we’ll have Council committees in place by the time of the following meeting (Feb 27). If not, their pay should be docked. Any mayoral votes taken at this meeting will be posted at http://cambridgecivic.com/?p=1750.

There are a few agenda items for this meeting, starting with the Big Ticket Items:

City Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the rescission of $14,881,482 which is the balance of the loan order approved by the City Council on Nov 17, 2008 for renovations to the Cambridge Rindge and Latin School (CRLS).

City Manager’s Agenda #3. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation of an additional $6,515,000 to cover unanticipated costs related to renovations to the old police station at Five Western Avenue in Central Square. This appropriation will be financed through a loan order for $5,770,000 and a transfer of $745,000 in bond proceeds from the Radio Replacement project.

Unfinished Business #5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the authorization to borrow an amount not to exceed $36,800,000 for the purpose of refinancing existing General Obligation Bonds to acquire lower interest rates than those currently being paid. The question comes on adoption on or after Feb 13, 2012.

The first of these is good news – the CRLS renovations cost less than anticipated, but it was still a lot of money. The second is the reverse – the renovations of the old Police Station will cost another $6.5 million on top of the $14.5 million loan already authorized. The third is the refinancing Order passed two weeks earlier which is now up for final adoption.

City Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the proposed MBTA fare increases and service cuts.

There has been a lot of public reaction to the proposed substantial MBTA fare increases and service reductions. The theme running through much of this is that the debt loaded onto the MBTA by the state legislature is the main cause of its structural deficit: "The financial problem is compounded by the MBTA’s approximately $5 billion in debt, the majority of which is from the Central Artery/Tunnel project (CA/T). Transit expansion projects were included in the CA/T project to mitigate the traffic growth and environmental impacts caused by the greater capacity of the tunnel, as compared with the former elevated expressway. One third of current MBTA operating expenses pay for this debt service, meaning investments that would keep the system in a state of good repair and running reliably are repeatedly postponed." Without that debt, the current fares would cover most of the operations. The MBTA will hold a public meeting in Cambridge on February 29, 2012 from 6-8pm at the Cambridge Senior Center.

On the Table #1. The Wyman Street curb cut.

Regardless of the merits, this whole matter has become very tiresome. There must be some form of Solomonic wisdom that will satisfy the concerns of all parties. It’s a curb cut – not an international peace treaty.

Unfinished Business #2. Election of the Mayor and Vice Mayor

See comments above. Please end this absurdity.

Resolution #12. Retirement of D. Margaret Drury from the City Clerk’s Office.   Mayor Reeves

It would be nice to read the text of this Resolution online. Ironically, it is the policy of the City Clerk that only the Policy Orders are viewable online – not the ceremonial Resolutions. I’m sure there are many nice things expressed in the Resolution, but we can only guess.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct City staff to replace the words "approve" and "disapprove" with the words "support" and "do not support" or, as appropriate, by some other terms that will help clarify where relevant authority rests when considering curb cuts.   Mayor Kelley

This is the biggest load of semantic crap I’ve seen in the City Council in ages. Perhaps Mayor Kelley also feels that when a pollster calls asking if he approves of the President’s handling of the economy, this will automatically establish or extend federal economic policy.

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council on the ownership status of the Cambridge Street overpass plaza and any relevant conditions of that ownership, to include responsibilities for maintenance, the ability to close off areas of the plaza to the general public and the power to grant location rights to food trucks.   Mayor Kelley

One of the joys of sticking around for a few years is that you can better appreciate the recurrence of events. I still have fond memories of Councillor Al Vellucci filing a virtually identical Order more than two decades ago. None of the sitting councillors have the flair of good old Al Vellucci. In applying pressure on Harvard University for some issue of the day, Al took to the Council floor telling of his vision of families from East Cambridge setting up victory gardens on the overpass where they could grow basil and other garden delights. I don’t recall if this led to any definitive statements about who was responsible for what, but my recollection is that the land is City-owned and that Harvard is responsible for maintaining it. Whether this extends to permitting food trucks to operate there (a very good thing, in my opinion) may be in that grey area that I’m glad still exists.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Assistant City Manager for Community Development to ascertain the date or approximate date on which the shelter at Brookline and Erie Streets will be installed and report back to the City Council.   Mayor Simmons

Speaking of the recurrence of events spread over the years, this proposed bus shelter across the street from Mayor Simmons’ insurance company office has been the subject of so many Council Orders that I’ve lost count.

Order #8. That the City Council urges the Community Development Department to work with the Floating Rock and their landlord Just Mass LLC toward finding an equitable compromise that would be fair to both parties, and that would allow the Floating Rock to remain in operation in Central Square.   Mayor Simmons

This is an interesting new role for CDD – negotiating leases for commercial tenants. Better get in line, folks. As the gentrification of Central Square continues, there may be the need for many more such Council Orders and CDD intervention as familiar haunts are squeezed out in favor of more upscale venues.

Order #9. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the Council on the continuation of the Longfellow Community School Program and its companion program, the Longfellow Neighborhood Council.   Mayor vanBeuzekom

We were down this road before when the Longfellow Elementary School was relocated/merged with the Kennedy School in East Cambridge about ten years ago. The Community School Program was originally designed to more fully utilize public school buildings to provide additional community benefit, so in that sense it was somewhat logical to end the Longfellow Community School when the school was closed. However, over time each community school and its associated community council does assume a life of its own – independent of the physical building – and an argument could be made for its preservation even if the building closed. The Longfellow program was temporarily relocated and was preserved.

In the case of the Longfellow School, the building never went away. It was simply re-purposed for other school uses as well as for the temporary location of the Main Library during its renovation/expansion. It’s quite justifiable for the associated community school and the Longfellow Neighborhood Council to be preserved. It is, however, a fact that the identity of these community schools is often tied to the person who is in charge of the program – in this case, Penny Kleespies who recently retired. This is a natural time for the City and the City Manager to evaluate the future of the program.

I personally believe there is value in maintaining this community school and its neighborhood council with the understanding that it must identify what its future mission is to be. Mid-Cambridge is the most populous neighborhood in the city and this program has the potential to be a great benefit. The Longfellow building is currently moth-balled, and the Community School is not able to remain in the building (I’m not sure exactly where it is now operating). Next year (presumably) the King School will be temporarily moved into the Longfellow building while its current building is demolished and reconstructed. I assume that the King School’s community school program may come with it for the duration. This will then be repeated with two other schools later in the decade.

This does not bode well for the existing Longfellow Community School Program if the other programs move with their respective schools. If a community school program is to serve the local neighborhood, it seems to me that simply cycling several other community school programs through the Longfellow building does nothing for Mid-Cambridge. On the other hand, our brilliant School Committee saw fit to eliminate all elementary schools from the city’s most populous neighborhood when it closed the Longfellow School a decade ago.

I will not rally around the preservation of any program simply because it exists or because there is some sentiment to preserve somebody’s job. That’s the kind of patronage attitude that has corrupted the state and this city for years. I do, however, believe that if the whole purpose of community school programs is to "foster community" and provide a space and programming for local neighborhoods, then the city’s most populous neighborhood should not be denied this service.

Order #12. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department about developing a process which would require developers seeking zoning relief to build a model of the area impacted by the proposed developments prior to coming before the City Council for voting purposes.   Mayor Decker

This is already done with many, perhaps most, major proposed developments when they come before the Planning Board. Whether this should be required by the City Council is questionable. The architectural expertise is at the Planning Board, and if they feel the need for cardboard or styrofoam models (or pop-up books) for projects, that should be their call. City councillors are not elected to serve as architects. They always have the option of attending Planning Board meetings if they feel the need for a more enriched architectural perspective.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Deputy City Clerk, transmitting a report from Mayor Craig Kelley, Chair of the Transportation, Traffic and Parking Committee for a public meeting held on Sept 15, 2011 to discuss bike parking, enforcement, bike sharing and facilities.

There are a few odd topics from this meeting held 5 months ago and only now reported. For example:

"Ms. Seiderman noted that Cambridge parking meters do not, contrary to Mayor Kelley’s statement, have bike rings attached to them as City staff and drivers needing to access the meter heads can find attached bicycles difficult to get around." – This is a statement that needs to be challenged. Cyclists have been locking the bikes to parking meters for as long as there have been locks and parking meters. The possibility that someone cannot access the meter head due to a parked bicycle seems extraordinarily unlikely.

"Mayor Kelley stated that he is not a cycle track advocate." – On this we agree. With all the rhetoric about conflicts caused by bicyclists riding on sidewalks, it seems wrong-headed to set up "cycle tracks" on sidewalks that are guaranteed to significantly increase conflicts with pedestrians. This is what I see nearly every day on Vassar Street where those tracks are installed. It’s one thing to build separate facilities to parallel Memorial Drive or another highway, but they make little sense elsewhere where vehicular speeds are moderate. Children can and do ride on the sidewalk, but this is not the place for adults. – Robert Winters

February 5, 2012

Feb 6, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , — Robert Winters @ 10:36 pm

Feb 6, 2012 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Actually, there aren’t any. Councillor Kelley announced last week that he would not be at this meeting, so unless that changes, don’t expect a mayoral ballot to take place at this meeting. Also, two of the more controversial matters that were tabled last week via Charter Right were the following Orders from Councillor Kelley that likely have minimal support from his colleagues. Expect them to be "Placed on File under Rule 19" without action, or possibly be amended by substitution to introduce plans more suitable to the majority of councillors.

Charter Right #12. That the Acting Chair of the City Council is requested to appoint a temporary committee of three Council members to start the process of searching for and hiring a replacement City Clerk. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Davis on Order Number Four of Jan 30, 2012 submitted by Councillor Kelley.]

Charter Right #13. That the Acting Chair of the City Council is requested to appoint a temporary committee of three City Council members to start the process of setting up a City Council review of the City Manager and to start the discussion with the City Manager of his intentions. [Charter Right exercised by Councillor Davis on Order Number Five of Jan 30, 2012 submitted by Councillor Kelley.]

Unfinished Business #15. That the matter of the election of the Mayor and Vice Mayor be referred to Unfinished Business. Jan 30, 2012 ballot #4 (Councillor Cheung three votes; Councillor Davis one vote; Councillor Decker three votes; Councillor Kelley one vote and Councillor Toomey one vote) ballot #5 taken (Councillor Cheung three votes; Councillor Davis one vote; Councillor Decker two votes; Councillor Reeves two votes and Councillor Toomey one vote) ballot #6 taken (Councillor Cheung three votes; Councillor Davis one vote; Councillor Decker two votes; Councillor Reeves two vote and Councillor Toomey one vote)

That’s pretty much it until next week. It will be more interesting to see what happens Tuesday night at the School Committee meeting when they are expected to vote on the "Academic Challenge Plan" that’s part of the ongoing Innovation Agenda implementation. Will the School Committee vote in favor of mediocrity? Probably. Or maybe they’ll delay the vote. – Robert Winters

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress