Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

Money & Politics – Featured Items on the October 26, 2020 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Here are my picks for this week:

Order #2. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct the Community Development Department and other relevant City personnel to establish a plan that will allow for greater outreach to women-and-minority-owned businesses, technical assistance to these businesses in applying for financial relief, and a clear plan to ensure that those small businesses that have not yet received financial assistance be granted every opportunity to access any future City funding should it be made available, and to report back to the City Council on this matter in a timely manner.   Councillor Simmons
Approved 9-0 without discussion

There should be no argument about the ideal of broad outreach and, if necessary, even targeted outreach to ensure that available resources are equitably provided. There does come a point, however, when this crosses the line into political patronage and favoritism. During the cannabis brouhaha last year over how City ordinances could be crafted to provide advantages to social equity and economic empowerment applicants one couldn’t help but notice how many former elected officials were lining up to cash in on these advantages. Inequities in financial assistance necessitated by closures due to the pandemic are likely due to some potential recipients being less savvy about how to access benefits, but suggesting that outreach should be targeted only to women-and-minority-owned businesses seems more like favoritism than anything else. Shouldn’t outreach be to any and all businesses who may be unfamiliar with how to access benefits?

Order #3. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to raise this issue with the appropriate representatives of the Cambridge Crossing buildings, and with the appropriate representatives of the Governor’s Office, to ensure that these businesses are not in violation of any current statewide Covid-19 protocols.   Councillor Simmons
Approved 9-0 without discussion

Apparently there have been “party buses” full of unmasked party animals seen driving in and out of the emerging Cambridge Crossing area, a.k.a. North Point. Perhaps the party animals could be quarantined in the buses for a couple of weeks rather than release them into the general population. Party on, Wayne. Party on, Garth.

Order #4. That the City Council adopt a municipal ordinance to reduce or prohibit campaign donations from donors seeking to enter into a contract, seeking approval for a special permit or up-zoning, seeking to acquire real estate from the city, or seeking financial assistance from the city.   Councillor Carlone, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zondervan
Charter Right – Simmons

This is really the centerpiece of this week’s agenda. It’s not the first time such a proposal has been floated in the City Council, and it always provides a wonderful opportunity for councillor doublespeak. While my personal preference is to simply require fully transparent disclosure of political donations from anyone, including those with potential business before the City, the simple truth is that it’s ethically questionable to receive such donations. If you dig into the contributions made during the 2019 municipal election season there was a lot of money coming from people affiliated with real estate development (including labor unions whose members would stand to get additional work) and cannabis. There were also significant contributions from those in the nonprofit housing world who wanted the City to amend zoning to deliver more projects to them.

Some incumbents and challengers have outright refused donations from anyone involved in real estate. I personally think that’s excessive and maybe even a bit snobby. Some people who deal in real estate are friends and neighbors who are very charitable with their time and talent (and money) in civic affairs. On the other hand, there are some councillors who take in tons of money from those with business before the City, and their votes generally do align with those interests. We all know that correlation does not imply causation, but it certainly does raise an eyebrow or two – and it should. The fact that some councillors wait until just after the election to receive such large donations seems even more problematic – at least to me – because it evades any disclosure that might have influenced voters.

The 2019 election featured a new twist – questioning the propriety of residents who own homes making political donations. The suggestion was that their favored councillors might vote in such a way that might cause their property to rise in value. Earth to Cambridge – those values have been rising primarily due to factors that have little to do with City Council actions. That fact, of course, will never stand in the way of political rhetoric by those who like to point fingers. Let’s also acknowledge that during the rent control era nobody suggested a conflict of interest in councillors receiving financial and political support from those whose primary motivation was keeping their rent controlled. Is there anyone who doesn’t have at least some sort of financial interest in election outcomes and political actions?

Order #5. That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to work with the Solicitor to draft Ordinance language to prohibit the use of tear gas in Cambridge.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui
Charter Right – Simmons

I believe the Police Department has said they don’t use tear gas, and I can’t imagine that policy changing. So what exactly is the reason for making this an ordinance other than just political showmanship?

Order #6. That the City must work with all major housing providers to eliminate or reduce the filing of evictions during the ongoing COVID-19 public health crisis.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Referred to Housing Committee 9-0

Unlike the alarmist rhetoric coming from my State Misrepresentative (Connolly), this order is all about negotiation and facilitation for better outcomes. Who can argue with that? – Robert Winters