Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 18, 2021

Rites and Rongs of Spring – March 22, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 9:01 pm

Rites and Rongs of Spring – March 22, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here’s my vernal-eyed view of this week’s proceedings:First Sign of Spring

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a COVID-19 update on vaccination rollout.
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #4. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui, transmitting questions for the City Manager’s COVID-19 update.
Placed on File 9-0

Still searching for that vaccination. Preregistered for Covid vaccine. Got a call telling me to call 211 to book an appointment. Called 211 and was told there are no appointments available. So what was the call about? This is typical Massachusetts. Who can I bribe to get a vaccination appointment? (I’m age-eligible.)

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of a grant received from MAPC in the amount of $52,250 which will be used for technical assistance for 1) planning and permitting the expansion of the floating wetland pilot in the Charles; 2) outlining and disseminating a permitting road map and lessons learned that can enable similar capital, resiliency projects; and 3) engagement with the wider community to support understanding of water quality and to inform the expansion process.
Order Adopted 9-0

I really do like projects like this, but as long as it’s now OK to put things in the river, how about a floating boardwalk on the back side of the Museum of Science garage to create a quiet pedestrian connection on the river away from the traffic on the Craigie Bridge? Decades have now passed since this idea was “floated.”

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to proposed amendments to the Tree Protection Ordinance. [DPR letter] [proposed ordinance changes]
Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-1 (Toomey – NO)

On the Table #5. The Health & Environment Committee met on Oct 13, 2020 to discuss amending the Tree Protection Ordinance based on the findings of the Urban Forest Master Plan Task Force.
Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-1 (Toomey – NO)

On the Table #6. The Health & Environment Committee met on Nov 10, 2020 to continue discussing amending the Tree Protection Ordinance based on the findings of the Urban Forest Master Plan Task Force.
Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-1 (Toomey – NO)

Among the shortcomings in the proposed revised Tree Protection Ordinance is that it only considers single lots in isolation. The removal of a "significant tree" on one lot would trigger significant cost or tree replacements on that lot even if the removal might be greatly beneficial to trees on an adjacent lot. There are also no guidelines regarding what might be considered dangerous, e.g. very close proximity to a building. Prior to ordination there should also be provided a list of some examples with actual costs so that people can get a sense of the potential burdens that may be imposed on homeowners.

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to recommendations for the block rates for water consumption and sewer use for the period beginning Apr 1, 2021 and ending Mar 31, 2022. [City Manager letter]
Order Adopted 9-0

Water rates are proposed to go up 1% and sewer rates are proposed to go up 8% for a combined increase of 6.5%. For the lowest block, it’ll cost you $3.05 to buy 750 gallons of water and $13.51 to get rid of it.

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to suggested zoning text amendments as well as amendments to Chapter 5.50 of the Municipal Code regarding cannabis delivery businesses. [Law Department memo] [Zoning text] [Municipal Code]
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 9-0

The proposed zoning and ordinance changes replace the recently expired zoning proposal. Though I don’t oppose any of the individual proposed cannabis business locations I often think about what the cumulative effect of all of this might be. Cambridge doesn’t generally do a very good job of considering The Big Picture when pushing their favored few things, and cannabis has definitely been a favored thing over the last few years among councillors.

Resolution #6. Standing in Solidarity with Asian Community and Condemning White Supremacy.   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey
Adopted as Amended 9-0

I don’t suppose you’ll find anyone around here who supports any of the things that this Order condemns, but both "Resolved" statements in the resolution draw conclusions that may not necessarily be true.

Order #1. Opposing wood-burning biomass plants.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui
Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #2. In Support of the FARE Act.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui
Adopted 9-0

This proposal would make public transit free on the days of all statewide primary and general elections. The idea of making it free every day is not actually insane.

Order #3. Making Remote Participation in City Council Meetings Permanent.   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Zondervan
Adopted as Amended 9-0

I’m pretty sure that remote participation is here to stay in some form or another regardless of this City Council order. There are a few observations I might make about the whole experience. First, it does provide more equitable access to public meetings, so I guess that’s a positive from a democracy point of view. On the other hand, it has facilitated what I sometimes call “democracy by the pound” where tech-savvy organizers can marshal their troops to read scripted comments from the comfort of home. Like the much-maligned-of-late and far-to-easy-to-invoke filibuster rule, I generally leans toward having at least minor hurdles to increase the fraction of serious democratic participants and ideas. Perhaps showing up in person to a meeting isn’t the only way to do this and we have seen ill-informed parades of actual people at public meetings in recent years carrying the flag of their various noble causes. The depth of the pond just seems more shallow of late. On balance, I’d say that ensuring some remote participation is still a good thing – especially for those who may be physically less able to make their way to the Sullivan Chamber or other civic venue. I still prefer to do things in person.

There’s another aspect of this virtual zoom-government that I consider to be a Big Problem. Citizens may get to tune in to watch the political equivalent of Hollywood Squares and maybe even give their 120 seconds of public comment before being muted with no opportunity for rebuttal (which you could always do in person outside the Sullivan Chamber). They may even be able to watch the recorded meetings in their leisure time. However, Open Meeting Law or not, there’s a lot of deliberation and decision-making that now takes place out of public view. Significant proposals often simply rise out of the virtual firmament and the public gets to react far more than it gets a chance to act and often too late to make any real difference. Neighborhood listservs have become the dreadful forum of action and reaction in which the loudest voices take up a lot more space than rational discussion. Social media campaigns have become the norm, and much of it is indistinguishable from propaganda.

Order #5. Opposing The MBTA Service Cuts.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern
Adopted as Amended 9-0

This is one of those cases where both sides are right. It sucks to cut back on public transportation while there’s still a pandemic, but because of the pandemic the ridership is a fraction of what it used to be and it’s crazy to be operating empty and near-empty trains and buses. Perhaps a Reality Compromise can be found. It’s not all about “winning.”

Committee Report #1. The Public Safety Committee met on Oct 14, 2020 to discuss traffic enforcement and Order #14 of July 27, 2020.
Accept Report, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Ordinance Committee met on Oct 28, 2020 to discuss the Real Estate Transfer Home Rule Petition.
Accept Report, Placed on File 9-0

The more I think about this the less I like it – even though it would likely not affect me personally (unless the redistributionists really go wild). In truth, I don’t like any revenue proposal that dedicates all the revenue to a single purpose, e.g. subsidized housing. It takes decisions about financial priorities out of the hands of the local legislature. I’m even having second thoughts about the Community Preservation Act for similar reasons. The rumor is that this Home Rule Petition doesn’t stand a chance in the State Legislature, though some believe that it could lead to enabling legislation that might allow any city or town to sock it to the seller. I hope not. Local control does not necessarily translate into fairness.

Committee Report #3. The Ordinance Committee met on Feb 11. 2021 to conduct a public hearing a petition to amend Article 8.000 of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance.
Accept Report, Placed on File 9-0; Passed to 2nd Reading

This is more of a technical correction based on recent court opinions and will like be passed to a 2nd Reading and ordained in a few weeks.

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui and Vice Mayor Mallon transmitting information about a Commercial Composting Pilot Program in Cambridge. [Cambridge Table to Farm Commercial Composting Report] [Cambridge Table to Farm Composting Fact Sheet]
Placed on File 9-0

I generally find this to be a good proposal, but there is a part of me who wonders whether this is more about cost avoidance for small businesses than it is about environmental salvation.

Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui, transmitting an update on the Charter Assessment Review. [Siddiqui memo] [Collins Center memo] [Appendices]
Placed on File 9-0

I piped up about this at last week’s Government Operations Committee meeting about the initial steps of the city manager search process. It seems a bit awkward to be talking about hiring the next city manager at the same time that some councillors are privately (and publicly) talking about shifting more power to themselves by possibly moving away from a city manager form of government. That would be a dreadful outcome, but once again that problem of invisibility behind the Zoom screen rears its ugly head. Overturning a system that has worked well for 80 years is not something that should be considered lightly.

Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui, transmitting communicating information from the School Committee.
Placed on File 9-0

With all this talk about searching for an interim school superintendent and then a "permanent" school superintendent in addition to the initial steps to search for the next city manager, all I can think of is John Wayne, Natalie Wood, and Jeffrey Hunter. – Robert Winters

March 8, 2021

Getting to know your job (or not) – Preview of the March 8, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,covid — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:08 pm

Getting to know your job (or not) – Preview of the March 8, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

When you have watched the Cambridge City Council for over three decades (as I have) you develop certain expectations. For example, when there are no City Council orders calling for the overthrow of Muammar Qaddafi, you start to worry if everyone is feeling OK or if they are in need of some intervention. You also come to expect a fair number of poorly-researched "drive-by orders" asking the City Manager and staff to dedicate many hours to explore some barely-formed notion that someone heard about in Santa Monica or elsewhere. I’m reasonably OK with the latter (mainly because I don’t have to follow up on the requests for information), but I have always found the former (foreign intervention) to be just a bit out of the range of the role of the City Council. This week we’ll hear about farmers in India.City Hall

Another common situation is the failure of some city councillors to understand what they can and cannot do under our Plan E Charter. In recent months we have seen efforts to micromanage City departments – most notably the License Commission and the Police Department (CPD), but also the Public Health Department. Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, in particular, has repeatedly expressed his frustration when five councillors expressing a point of view fails to result in all hands on deck carrying it out. In other words, his notion of a city manager is to not actually be a manager but rather a messenger incapable of making managerial decisions regarding logistics, financing, approving contracts, labor negotiation or much of anything else – as if doing so is somehow a breakdown in “democracy”.

One case in point this week is seen in the responses from the City Solicitor regarding whether the Cambridge City Council can forbid the use of tear gas by CPD (which it hasn’t actually used for nearly half a century). It’s now essentially a moot point thanks to recent state legislation and CPD policies restricting its use, but the Solicitor does take the councillors to school regarding the limits of Council authority in matters such as this. I generally find the expressed dichotomies of some councillors to be willfully ignorant. They may see this as a choice between peaceful negotiation and tear gas, but the significant choice really only comes up in a full-scale riot or insurrection when it’s a choice between lethal and non-lethal force – and it’s good to have non-lethal options in that case.

Some councillors a few weeks ago expressed frustration regarding the role of the License Commission in managing potential conflicts regarding live entertainment and enforcement of the Noise Ordinance in allowing acoustic music without a license. It’s great that the City Council wants to recommend some changes, but they also have the luxury of never having to adjudicate the conflicts. That said, the License Commission seems to have understood the desired goals and they are now proposing ways to realize those goals while still being able to adjudicate conflicts – something that is definitely not the job of a city councillor.

It is entirely proper for a city councillor to second-guess the decisions of the City Manager and his staff. It would also be proper for a councillor or even a majority of councillors to tell the Manager that they think one of his departments is dysfunctional. If the Manager remains unresponsive, a simple majority of the City Council can even exercise its nuclear option and send the Manager packing. On the other hand, if a city councillor chooses to bypass the Manager and directly browbeat a department head or other employee, that might actually cross the line into felony territory. Councillors need to know their limitations. That goes for their aides as well.

Here are the visible highlights this week:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an update on the COVID-19 vaccination rollout.
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui, transmitting COVID-19 Update Questions.
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui, communicating information from the School Committee.
Placed on File 9-0

Order #1. Mobile Vaccines Policy Order.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #2. Waiving Business Fees.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #3. Honoring the Cambridge Lives Lost to COVID-19.   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Order Adopted 9-0

The City’s many responses to the pandemic continue. Vaccinations are increasing and there is light at the end of the tunnel, but the 7-day averages of new cases are no longer decreasing – and this is a cause for some concern. It may be the presence of virus variants, and I’m sure the count will soon be decreasing again. In the meantime, we remain vigilant – and hopeful.

And soon there will be baseball.

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation on the Green Roofs Ordinance (Oliver, et al.) Zoning Petition.
Referred to Petition 9-0

The Planning Board recommends against adoption of this petition in its present form. While the intentions of the petitioners are to be respected, the petition is highly deficient in terms of definitions, practical considerations regarding maintenance and cost, and how the proposed requirements would interact with code requirements related to safety, accessibility, and building mechanical systems. It’s also unclear how this proposal dovetails with existing zoning regulations and other proposals now under consideration.

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Calendar Item Number 2 dated Nov 2, 2020, which requested draft ordinance language to prohibit the use of tear gas in Cambridge.
Placed on File 9-0

“I am of the opinion that the authority to dictate what weapons are used by Cambridge police officers when carrying out their official duties, under the City’s Plan E Charter and its Home Rule powers, rests with the City Manager and not the City Council; that future changes in weapons and equipment already in use by the Police Department would likely be subject to collective bargaining as to the impact of such changes; and that an ordinance restricting police officers from carrying assault weapons would thus be invalid as inconsistent with or frustrating the purposes of State law.” — That sums it up pretty well. Both responses from the City Solicitor are worth reading.

Charter Right #2. Task Force Transparency. [CHARTER RIGHT EXERCISED BY COUNCILLOR SIMMONS IN COUNCIL MAR 1, 2021 (Order #2 of Mar 1, 2021)]
Adopted as Amended by Simmons Substitution 9-0
[after QZ amendment to have joint meeting w/Public Safety Committee failed 3-6 (DC,JSW,QZ – YES)]

Regarding the Task Force, I’ll repeat what I said last week: “Apparently Councillor Zondervan and I have the same wish but likely for diametrically opposite reasons. I have been asking to get access to these meetings (or at least the recordings) of the new Task Force on the Future of Public Safety, and apparently now so is he. My concern is that I don’t want to see problematic people dominating the conversation, and I suspect Councillor Zondervan may desire to ensure the exact opposite. Public Safety, in my view, translates into an improved police force sharing specific responsibilities with others as appropriate. Others openly express a desire to abolish police entirely. That’s a non-starter for me and not a plausible outcome of this process, but I would like to at least sample the dialogue.”

Charter Right #3. Shelter Wages. [CHARTER RIGHT EXERCISED BY COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN IN COUNCIL MAR 1, 2021 (Order #4 of Mar 1, 2021)]
Adopted as Amended 9-0

Again, repeating what I said last week: “I have no idea what constitutes an appropriate wage for people who work at the 240 Albany Street wet shelter, but it’s not a City-owned facility and it serves the region and not just Cambridge residents. My understanding is that the City’s Living Wage Ordinance applies to people working for the City and to companies bidding on City contracts. Does this describe how the Bay Cove (formerly CASPAR) shelter operates? This is not the only facility they operate. [“Each year, Bay Cove provides services to more than 25,000 individuals and families who face the challenges of developmental and intellectual disabilities, mental illness, substance use disorder, homelessness and/or aging, at more than 170 program sites in Metro Boston and southeastern Massachusetts.”] There are waiver provisions in the ordinance. I’m curious to see how this plays out. After all, there are other shelter facilities in Cambridge that are not funded via City contracts. Would they all then be obliged to raise wages even if their funding sources cannot support it?”

On the Table #7. The Health & Environment Committee met on Oct 13, 2020 to discuss amending the Tree Protection Ordinance based on the findings of the Urban Forest Master Plan Task Force. [TABLED IN COUNCIL MAR 1, 2021 BY COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN]

Committee Report #1. The Health and Environment Committee met on Nov 10, 2020 to continue discussing amending the Tree Protection Ordinance based on the findings of the Urban Forest Master Plan Task Force.
Tabled 9-0 (Zondervan)

Once again, I hope that this City Council will somehow see the wisdom in not overly restricting reasonable choices of homeowners or burdening them with unreasonable costs.

Unfinished Business #9. The City Manager be and hereby is requested to confer with the City of Cambridge Law Department to review the above changes to the language of the Domestic Partnerships Ordinance and report back to the Council. [PASSED TO A SECOND READING IN COUNCIL JULY 27, 2020. TO BE ORDAINED ON OR AFTER SEPT 14, 2020]
Ordained as Amended 7-0-0-2 (Simmons, Toomey – PRESENT)

Committee Report #2. The Ordinance Committee met on Jan 20, 2021 to conduct a public hearing on amendments to the Domestic Partnership Ordinance.
Placed on File 9-0; Ordained as Amended 7-0-0-2 (Simmons, Toomey – PRESENT)

It looks like this may be ordained after many months of discussion. I’ll withhold my opinion regarding the need for such detailed revision.

Order #4. That the Cambridge City Council goes on record in support of the farmer protests in India.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

See my remarks above.

Order #5. That the City Manager consult relevant staff to implement universal Pre-K in Cambridge.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Zondervan
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

This has been in the works for some time, and I look forward to seeing what the detailed implementation of this goal will actually looks like as we eventually emerge from this Covid nightmare. I suspect there will be plenty of nuance – in part informed by having a pre-K Montessori School on one side of me and a Rock & Roll Daycare on the other side of me and an elementary school building across the street. Any comprehensive plan will have to integrate new options with existing options in a way that parents and taxpayers can afford. – Robert Winters

March 2, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 493-494: March 2, 2021

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge InsideOut,campaign finance,City Council,covid — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:59 pm

Episode 493 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 2, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Mar 2, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Tree protection and reasonable latitude; Mayor Joe Curtatone of Somerville won’t seek reelection; campaign finance limits at the Ordinance Committee; legal issues with early/no-excuse absentee voting; roughing up the Voting Rights Act. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 494 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 2, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Mar 2, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: Alterations to single-family zoning up for discussion; Cambridge as a sandbox for national organizations and movements; factual vs. fictional history of Cambridge zoning; questioning support/guidelines for “neighborhood groups”; distinguishing neighborhood groups vs. advocacy groups vs. political groups; community schools program and neighborhood councils; Covid-19 update; Alewife zoning and a brief mention of the “land bank” proposal from 1990. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 28, 2021

March Madness – March 1, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 10:17 pm

March Madness – March 1, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here we go on the road to Spring and hopefully something at least a little closer to normalcy.City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an update on the COVID-19 vaccination rollout.
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui, transmitting questions for the COVID-19 update.
Placed on File 9-0

Though the overall trends are good, I am a little concerned that the 15-day moving average of new infections seems to have stopped its decline. Whether via vaccination or vigilance, those numbers have to be driven down.

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to additional information and revised Financial Analysis for the Alewife Zoning Petition.
Referred to Committee Report #3

Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee met on Dec 16, 2020 to conduct a public hearing on the Alewife Quadrangle Northwest Overlay petition.
Referred to Report #2

Committee Report #2. The Ordinance Committee met on Feb 10, 2021 to conduct a public hearing on the Alewife zoning petition.
Referred to Report #3

Committee Report #3. The Ordinance Committee met on Feb 16, 2020 to conduct a public hearing to continue discussion on the Alewife zoning petition.
Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended by Substitution 6-3 (DC,MM,PN,DS,JSW,SS – YES; AM,TT,QZ – NO)

The committee reports seem to suggest some continuing reluctance to approve this petition for reasons that vary all over the map. This may be the best shot at getting the bridge over the tracks that everyone seems to want, and if it does happen I hope it can at least support small shuttle buses rather than just bicycles and pedestrians. Linking the Alewife Quadrangle and Triangle in a meaningful way is a very worthwhile goal. It would be even better if there could be multiple crossings and a new commuter rail stop.

One person at the Dec 16 hearing said, "A single bridge really does not address the needs of the majority of the current workers and residents in the area. Three bridges would be optimal. Two bridges creating a loop for a shuttle with both directly benefit the residents at large but also provide linkage to potential customer servicing businesses." Though that might push things into deal-breaker territory, I agree with the general sentiment. I’ll add that if DCR can build an additional simple pedestrian bridge over the Little River north of this area that would make for a perfect combination.

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining its AAA rating from the nation’s three major credit rating agencies. [Moody’s] [Standard & Poor’s] [Fitch]
Placed on File 9-0

Even with the financial pressures from the pandemic we still managed to again pull off a triple triple. As usual, I’m sure there will be some people who will find a way to spin this as a bad thing.

Charter Right #1. The Health & Environment Committee met on Oct 13, 2020 to conduct a public hearing to discuss amending the Tree Protection Ordinance based on the findings of the Urban Forest Master Plan Task Force. [CHARTER RIGHT EXERCISED BY COUNCILLOR ZONDERVAN IN COUNCIL FEB 22, 2021]
Tabled 9-0 (Zondervan)

I suppose we’ll have to wait a little longer to resolve this, but I continue to hope that this City Council will somehow see the wisdom in not overly restricting reasonable choices of homeowners or burdening them with unreasonable costs.

On the Table #4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 20-64, requesting Home Rule language to allow for acoustic live entertainment performances in small businesses under certain conditions without a license. [TABLED IN COUNCIL FEB 22, 2021] [Related: Late Order #4 of Feb 22 meeting]

I’m not sure how this will ultimately play out, but at the very least I hope this City Council can appreciate that there may be differences in what should be permitted in a central business district like Central Square or Harvard Square or the Porter Square Shopping Center vs. some of the smaller neighborhood mixed use zones where there can be conflicts between entertainment uses and residential uses. I hope they can also consider the fact that uses by time of day are not really found in the zoning code and that it’s really the License Commission that helps to smooth out the potential conflicts.

On the Table #5. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 20-63, which requested a review of the granting of an extension for the 605 Concord Avenue project. [CHARTER RIGHT EXERCISED BY COUNCIL NOLAN IN COUNCIL FEB 3, 2021; TABLED IN COUNCIL FEB 8, 2021]
Placed on File 9-0

On the Table #6. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a further response to Calendar Item Number 2, regarding a report on reviewing the granting of an extension for the 605 Concord Avenue project, which was previously answered as Awaiting Report Item Number 20-63 on Feb 1, 2021. [TABLED IN COUNCIL FEB 22, 2021] [Related: Late Order #5 of Feb 22 meeting]
Placed on File 9-0

Both of these communications are still just as clear as an unmuddied lake or an azure sky of deepest summer – and laying on the table won’t make them any clearer. You don’t change the rules in the middle of the game.

Applications & Petitions #3. A Zoning Petition has been received from Beals Associates Inc. regarding Broad Canal Subdistrict Zoning Petition as submitted with strike outs.
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 9-0

Highlights: Up to 582,000 additional square feet in the form of an infill building between the two existing buildings; expanded retail space; activation of the ground floor and the public realm along Main Street and the Broad Canal; proposed floating restaurant in the Broad Canal; Broad Canal restoration and maintenance; upgrades to Poor Man’s Landing in the Charles River; restoration of the DCR Boathouse (old MDC Boathouse) near the Museum of Science.

Order #1. Lowell Street Property.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

This takes me back about 30 years to 1990-1991 when then City Councillor Ed Cyr proposed that the City identify various City-owned properties as possible housing sites – a "Land Bank". The list included about a dozen locations, including such places as the dead-end of Norfolk St. near DPW, the park house at the Corporal Burns Playground, and (you guessed it) 25 Lowell Street. I don’t have a strong opinion on this specific Order either way, but I do find it bizarre that there is now such a frenzy to densely develop every possible square inch of Cambridge land – especially if that land has an 02138 zip code.

We used to think in terms of prioritizing "transit-oriented development" or "smart growth". Now it’s just "development" and "growth" and the desire to build everywhere at maximum density regardless of any and all other factors. I guess this is how some people define "a better Cambridge" – not me. Several weeks ago some councillors expressed a desire to build on a newly-acquired softball field. Soon they’ll be taking up a proposal to more than double the allowable density across much of the city. It’s like they put amphetamines in the Cambridge Kool-Aid.

Order #2. Task Force Transparency.   Councillor Zondervan
Charter Right – Simmons

Apparently Councillor Zondervan and I have the same wish but likely for diametrically opposite reasons. I have been asking to get access to these meetings (or at least the recordings) of the new Task Force on the Future of Public Safety, and apparently now so is he. My concern is that I don’t want to see problematic people dominating the conversation, and I suspect Councillor Zondervan may desire to ensure the exact opposite. Public Safety, in my view, translates into an improved police force sharing specific responsibilities with others as appropriate. Others openly express a desire to abolish police entirely. That’s a non-starter for me and not a plausible outcome of this process, but I would like to at least sample the dialogue.

Order #3. Budget Reallocation Update.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0

This appears to be primarily a prompt by the sponsors to accelerate their desire to "Defund the Police".

Order #4. Shelter Wages.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Charter Right – Zondervan (with Mallon amendments pending)

I have no idea what constitutes an appropriate wage for people who work at the 240 Albany Street wet shelter, but it’s not a City-owned facility and it serves the region and not just Cambridge residents. My understanding is that the City’s Living Wage Ordinance applies to people working for the City and to companies bidding on City contracts. Does this describe how the Bay Cove (formerly CASPAR) shelter operates? This is not the only facility they operate. [“Each year, Bay Cove provides services to more than 25,000 individuals and families who face the challenges of developmental and intellectual disabilities, mental illness, substance use disorder, homelessness and/or aging, at more than 170 program sites in Metro Boston and southeastern Massachusetts.”] There are waiver provisions in the ordinance. I’m curious to see how this plays out. After all, there are other shelter facilities in Cambridge that are not funded via City contracts. Would they all then be obliged to raise wages even if their funding sources cannot support it?

Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from Mayor Siddiqui, communicating information from the School Committee.
Placed on File 9-0

Though informative, this communication also reports the unbearable tragedy of the suicide of a 10th grader in the Cambridge Public Schools. The process of finding an interim and "permanent" Superintendent of Schools continues, and expanded in-person learning begins this week on Monday. – Robert Winters

February 16, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 491-492: February 16, 2021

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge InsideOut — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:57 pm

Episode 491 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 16, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 16, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Impeachment and acquittal; redefinition of major parties; Red Sox; Covid update; observations on density and the “missing middle” petition; loosening of single-family zoning. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 492 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 16, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 16, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: In search of a Superintendent of Schools and the mythical visionary; eduspeak; young socialist robots invade public comment; democracy by the pound; SROs – an idea whose time may have come again; organically grown local politics. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

A few observations on density

Filed under: Cambridge,planning — Tags: , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:44 pm

A few observations on density

Feb 16, 2021 (w/Feb 17 addition of S. Normandy Ave.) – Several years ago I was thinking about the past, present, and future of Central Square and decided to simply take a walk through the Square with a camera with as objective an eye as I could manage. The result of that walk was something I called "Completing the Square" – a little math joke tied to the main observation that regardless of any opinions about how tall or dense Central Square may be or should be, there were lots of missing teeth and locations which could be improved by the presence of some new or enhanced buildings. That was before the new Mass & Main complex (now Market Central) was built.

In a similar vein, a couple of days ago I had the notion to do something of a virtual walk (in my head) along some streets with which I am quite familiar just to imagine how they might change under the proposed "Missing Middle Housing" zoning proposal. In my opinion, most of these streets function pretty well as they are and many of them (in particular those now zoned as Res C-1) would be considered pretty dense by any reasonable standard. I downloaded the City’s Assessors Database (thank you Open Data Portal!) and painstakingly reassembled all the living area information from the many condominiums in order to recreate the total living area to go with the total land area for each respective lot. (This was like reassembling puzzle pieces in some cases.) I then calculated the FAR (floor-area-ratio) for all lots on 28 representative streets (somewhat alphabetically biased as I went through them).

Prior to calculating some statistics on each of these streets I decided to exclude a few anomalies such as parks (no housing will be going there under any zoning revisions), municipal parking lots, City buildings (like City Hall, the Annex, DPW, etc.) as well as some lots that are in zoning districts unaffected by the proposed "Missing Middle Housing" zoning proposal, e.g. the Central Square BB district.
[You can view the data for each of these streets here.]

The summary sheet is below. Since there are already some nonconforming lots with FAR even greater than what is proposed in the petition, the increases noted below actually understate the increases under full build-out. On the other hand, it’s not likely that anything close to full build-out would happen any time soon (if the petition were to prevail), so this should be viewed more as a measure of what could eventually happen as opposed to what will happen in the near future.

Note that even a relatively dense C-1 street like Cherry Street in The Port could see a 66% increase in density. Chalk Street (Res C) could see a 72% increase. Cornelius Way could have a 175% increase (that’s 2.75 times the current density). Near me, Antrim Street could go up 47%, Maple Ave. could go up 84%, and Lee Street could go up 50%. In the leafy western "suburbs", a Res B street like Appleton St. could go up 137% (2.37 times the current density) and Lakeview Ave. (a mix of Res A-1 and Res B) would nearly triple in density. In contrast, Berkshire St. in Wellington-Harrington might only rise 2%, so I suppose this is the ideal street by the "Missing Middle" standard.

It’s also worth noting that there’s really nothing in the petition that would in any way ensure that the chief beneficiaries would be middle class residents. The petition is primarily a vehicle for increasing densities and this could just as easily translate into larger homes for those who can afford them or the freedom to add on significant additions to existing homes. In other words, the "middle" part of the "missing middle" petition is missing.- RW

Street zoning on street total
land area		 total
living area		 gross
FAR		 median
FAR		 max
FAR		 min
FAR		 MM
factor		 MM
increase
Amory St. C-1 166187 146798 0.88 0.89 2.25 0.00 1.40 40%
Andrew St. C-1 39671 36841 0.93 0.94 1.46 0.44 1.33 33%
Antrim St. C-1 215140 182351 0.85 0.85 1.59 0.45 1.47 47%
Appleton St. B 362349 167623 0.46 0.53 1.11 0.00 2.37 137%
Arlington St. A-2,B,C-2 162551 82694 0.51 0.51 0.94 0.31 2.45 145%
Avon Hill St. A-2,B 159726 86824 0.54 0.64 1.04 0.25 1.95 95%
Bellis Circle B,C-1A 134257 86705 0.65 0.69 1.24 0.36 1.80 80%
Berkeley St. & Pl. A-2 335663 147702 0.44 0.44 1.08 0.18 2.87 187%
Berkshire St. & Pl. C-1 142900 162073 1.13 1.22 2.42 0.00 1.02 2%
Bigelow St. C-1 98544 99178 1.68 0.99 2.48 0.55 1.27 27%
Bristol St. C-1 105743 98448 0.93 0.89 2.09 0.34 1.40 40%
Brookline St. B,C,BA-1,C-1,BB,SD9 462788 420848 0.91 0.88 2.59 0.00 1.41 41%
Buena Vista Pk. C-1 58147 42787 0.74 0.75 1.05 0.46 1.67 67%
Centre St. C-1 112030 118881 1.06 0.86 1.81 0.58 1.46 46%
Chalk St. C-1 59707 40178 0.67 0.73 1.35 0.30 1.72 72%
Chatham St. C-1 45415 43055 0.95 0.87 1.73 0.61 1.44 44%
Cherry St. C-1 140624 83033 0.59 0.75 1.26 0.00 1.66 66%
Columbia St. C1,BA,BB-CSQ 419529 435148 1.04 1.01 3.33 0.00 1.24 24%
Coolidge Hill Rd. A-2,A-1 155629 65633 0.42 0.55 1.85 0.00 2.26 126%
Cornelius Way C-1 67640 31196 0.46 0.45 0.83 0.30 2.75 175%
Dudley St. B 162444 135259 0.83 0.83 1.48 0.24 1.51 51%
Hurley St. C-1 185549 196004 1.06 1.09 2.45 0.42 1.15 15%
Inman St. C-1 386571 347610 0.90 0.88 2.36 0.34 1.41 41%
Lakeview Ave. A-1,B 717287 299854 0.42 0.42 1.07 0.15 2.99 199%
Lee St. C-1 184726 167663 0.91 0.83 2.17 0.48 1.50 50%
Maple Ave. B,C-1 198500 132455 0.67 0.68 1.57 0.36 1.84 84%
Norfolk St. C-1,B,BA 445240 445634 1.00 0.88 3.31 0.00 1.41 41%
Pleasant St. C,C-1,BA-3 387351 425992 1.10 0.93 2.27 0.36 1.34 34%
S. Normandy Ave. B 69538 24909 0.36 0.38 0.51 0.19 3.26 226%
all sample streets   6181446 4753376 0.77          

gross FAR = total living area divided by total land area
median FAR = median FAR of all lots on the street
max FAR = largest FAR for all lots on the street
min FAR = smallest FAR for all lots on the street (note that there may be vacant lots with FAR of 0)
MM factor = ratio of proposed "Missing Middle" FAR of 1.25 to current median FAR for street
MM increase = percent increase in FAR from current median FAR under full build-out

FAR-MMcalculations

February 3, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 489-490: February 2, 2021

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge InsideOut,City Council,covid — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:19 am

Episode 489 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 2, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 2, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Covid-19 status and vaccination roll-out; challenges of non-congregate housing; Kendall Square Urban Redevelopment Plan; Alewife Quadrangle/Triangle planning and transportation for real; Jerry’s Pond optimism; significant retirements. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 490 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 2, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 2, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: Early days of Cambridge Recycling; Retirements of Lisa Peterson, Susan Fleischman, and Liza Paden; false advertising and the “Missing Middle Housing” zoning petition; how dense is dense enough?; hostile architecture – or not?; Cambridge City Council on hallucinogens. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 2, 2021

Pre/Post-Groundhog Day featured attractions – Feb 3, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 4:22 pm

Pre/Post-Groundhog Day featured attractions – Feb 3, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here goes — A lot to chew on…..Groundhog

The Feb 1 meeting was postponed to Wed, Feb 3 due to the Snow Emergency.

Starting with The Plague
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an update on COVID-19.
Placed on File 9-0

Order #2. Policy Order re: Establishing an On-Site Vaccination Program.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #4. Policy Order re: Covid-19 Protocols at Affordable Housing Worksites.   Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #7. Vaccinating CPS Staff Plan PO.   Vice Mayor Mallon
Tabled – Mallon (9-0)

Order #8. Supporting the School Committee.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted as Amended 7-1-0-1 (Zondervan – NO, Sobrinho-Wheeler – PRESENT)

Stay Positive and Test Negative. Seriously, we should get all teachers and school staff vaccinated and able to do their jobs without fear as soon as humanly possible.

Coronagenda
Charter Right #1. That the City further investigate renting space from the New England School of English to house appropriate members of our unhoused community. [CHARTER RIGHT EXERCISED BY COUNCILLOR SIMMONS IN COUNCIL JAN 11, 2021]
Adopted as Amended 7-0-0-2 (DS,TT – PRESENT)

This now obsolete Order (the space on Green Street has been rented as state-funded temporary housing for a some time now) was contained in the Nov 12 committee report of a public hearing on homelessness. The New England School of English apparently made available their dormitory space on Green Street that had been vacant due to the current pandemic. It was never meant to be a long-term arrangement. Activists are using this opportunity to push an agenda centered on the demand that the City establish and fund non-congregate shelter/housing for unhoused individuals. Not addressed in their demands is the fact that without similar facilities being established in Boston and elsewhere this effectively becomes a regional facility drawing people from all over the Greater Boston area. Also not addressed by the activists are the staffing and logistical challenges associated with a clientele with a high incidence of substance abuse and mental health challenges. Indeed, during the relatively short time the Green Street facility has been open there have been several drug overdoses and one suicide (jump from the parking garage across the street). One of the great luxuries of activism is that you rarely have to deal with the hard stuff.

A little open space while we still can…. and the joys of mitigation
Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $5,717,250 from the Mitigation Stabilization Fund to the Public Investment Fund Department of Public Works Extraordinary Expenditures account. Funds were received from contributions to the East Cambridge Open Space Fund and will be used will be used to fund the design and construction of three new parks in the East Cambridge/Kendall Square area; Timothy J. Toomey, Jr. Park, Triangle Park and Binney Street Park.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $3,174,389 from Free Cash to the Mitigation Revenue Stabilization Fund which will be used to fund specific future projects, which will require separate individual appropriations by the City Council.
Order Adopted 9-0

Zoning and legal matters
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 19-142, regarding a report on determining the feasibility of expediting the demolition and rebuilding permitting process in the event of a natural disaster.
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 20-63, which requested a review of the granting of an extension for the 605 Concord Avenue project.
Charter Right – Nolan

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation to adopt with comments and suggested modifications, the Alewife Quadrangle Northwest Overlay District (Srinivasan, et al.) Zoning Petition.
Referred to Petition 9-0

"The Board encourages the City Council to carefully consider to what extent a bridge may or may not be guaranteed as part of a Quadrangle Northwest Master Plan Special Permit and what types of alternatives would be acceptable to the City." – Ideally, this area should have its own commuter rail stop and multiple crossings over the railroad tracks, including at least one crossing that would permit shuttle buses and possibly other vehicles. The Alewife Triangle and Quadrangle should be united rather than forever remain separate oversized cul-de-sacs. Property owners and developers should recognize the value in this or seek another line of work.

Unfinished Business #5. A Zoning Petition has been received from Cambridge Redevelopment Authority regarding a Zoning Ordinance to reflect the proposed changes to the KSURP. [PASSED TO A SECOND READING IN COUNCIL JAN 11, 2021. TO BE ORDAINED ON OR AFTER JAN 25, 2021] [Petition and Memo] [Draft Letter of Commitment]
Ordained 9-0

Communications #1. A communication was received from Tom Evans, Cambridge Redevelopment Authority, submitting a Letter of Commitment to accompany the MXD Zoning Petition and Kendall Square Urban Redevelopment Plan submission.
Adopted, Letter of Commitment incorporated; Placed on File 9-0

Ordination seems likely at this meeting. I’ll leave the details as a reading assignment.

And then there’s this
Applications & Petitions #1. A Zoning Petition has been received from Carolyn Fuller – Ordinance #2021-2 Cambridge Missing Middle Housing Zoning Petition. [Text of petition] [signatures]
Referred to Ordinance Committee and Planning Board for Hearing and Report 9-0

The organization that calls itself "A Better Cambridge" (ABC) has now fully earned its alternative name "A Bigger Cambridge". The crux of this petition is the merging of the Residence A-1, A-2, B, C, and C-1 districts into a single unified Residence N district with dramatically increased allowable density (FAR 1.25 – Floor-Area-Ratio, the ratio of built living area as a fraction of the land area of the lot) and greatly diminished front, side and rear setbacks. It also permits additional height to allow 3 stories across all these combined districts. The appellation "Missing Middle Housing" has, in fact, nothing to do with this proposal other than as a sales pitch. In addition to allowing multi-family housing in all zones, this is simply a petition to increase – by a factor of 2 to 3 in many cases – the amount that can be built across the city – a real Gold Rush for property developers. For example, the Res A-1 and A-2 districts currently permit a 0.5 FAR; Res C permits a 0.6 FAR; and Res C-1 permits a 0.75 FAR. This proposal simply blows the lid off all of these allowable densities. Apparently, the fact that Cambridge is already one of the densest cities in the United States is simply not enough for the Sim City players who form the core of "A Bigger Cambridge". In terms of affordability for the "missing middle" there is simply nothing in this petition that would indicate this as a likely outcome. The affordability of the traditional two-family or three-family home in years past came with the responsibilities of being a landlord with the rents helping to cover the mortgage. This proposal would more likely result in even larger single-family homes (McMansions) and a greater stock of high-end condominiums and investment properties.

It’s true that Cambridge has a lot of nonconforming buildings that could not have been built under current zoning, including my own triple-decker (land area 3,133 sq ft, total living area 3,978 sq ft, and an FAR of 1.27 with negligible side setbacks and a very small yard). If I were proposing changes to Cambridge zoning I would likely allow some additional density where it makes sense, but I certainly would not recommend the replication of my own situation on my tiny lot as the new standard.

What exactly is the goal of ABC? New York City ranks 6th with a population density of 27,016 per square mile. San Francisco ranks 21st at 17,246. Somerville is 16th at 18,432. Cambridge ranks 26th in the USA at 16,355. Boston is 51st at 13,321. Chicago is 75th at 11,868. Philadelphia is 95th at 11,234. Berkeley is 110th at 10,753. Cambridge is not Belmont (5,317/sq mi).

Suffice to say, I think the general lay of the land in Cambridge today is actually quite good – an interesting balance of densities and housing types. Some greater flexibility for property owners might be a good thing, but wholesale redefinition of the city would not be a wise choice.

Bikes, bikes, and more bikes and other transportation matters
Manager’s Agenda #11. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $115,300 received in donations received from MIT Real Estate, Museum of Science, and CambridgeSide to the Public Investment Fund Community Development Department Extraordinary Expenses account which will be used for costs associated with the BlueBikes bikeshare system.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #12. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $452,600 from the Mitigation Revenue Stabilization Fund received from various sources to the Public Investment Fund Community Development Extraordinary Expenditures account which will be used for the purchase and expenses of Bluebikes bikeshare equipment.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #14. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number Awaiting Report 19-75, regarding the feasibility of partnering with a local research institution to conduct a study that determines how many ridehail vehicles are on the roads during both on and off-peak times and their impacts on congestion and safety.
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #15. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 19-151, regarding the feasibility of making Porter Square and Massachusetts Avenue between Roseland Street and Beech Street a quick-build complete street with bus priority.
Placed on File 9-0

2013 Cambridge commuter shares: 28% transit, 24% walk, 7% bike, 4% carpool. The numbers have likely shifted a bit since 2013 but even with BlueBike stations and various infrastructure changes across the city it’s unlikely that the share of residents biking will ever rival transit or walking. At any given time are there more bikes on Cambridge roads or Ubers? If electric vehicles and or/autonomous vehicles proliferate, what do you think will be the result?

21st Century Commerce
Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 20-56, regarding establishing a plan that will allow for greater outreach and technical assistance to women-and-minority-owned businesses and small businesses that have not yet received financial assistance to assess any future City funding. [CDD report]
Placed on File 9-0

Resolution #14. The Cambridge City Council, hereby assembled, urges Amazon to meet and confer with the Cambridge community, included, but not limited to, representatives of labor unions including the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 25.   Councillor McGovern, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey
Adopted 9-0

Order #1. Spending Disparity Study PO.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0

Thank You Notes
Resolution #7. Retirement of CCTV Executive Director, Susan Fleischmann.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons
Charter Right – Mallon

Resolution #15. Thank You to Lisa Peterson.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Nolan
Adopted 9-0

Resolution #17. Thank You to Elizabeth “Liza” Malenfant Paden.   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Toomey
Adopted 9-0

I have known all of these Great Women of Cambridge for decades. Susan Fleischmann is the one who pushed me to start doing TV broadcasts – initially with Election Night coverage and then eventually the sequel to the original Cambridge InsideOut. I first met Lisa Peterson when she worked in the City Manager’s Office during Bob Healy’s tenure. She was our point person during the early days of Cambridge Recycling about 30 years ago. Liza (and, really, all you have to say is Liza in Cambridge civic circles and everyone knows who you mean) has been a friend in and out of City government – along with her extended family – for close to 30 years. The total hours I kept Liza from getting back to work on Inman Street over the years gabbing about life and politics and how the city operates is something we’d better not talk about lest they dock her retirement.

A growing chorus of voices from Fairmont Avenue
Order #6. Policy Order re: Renaming Fairmont Avenue.   Councillor Simmons
Charter Right – Simmons

Oh, the hardship. I guess we’d also better start worrying about Washington Ave. vs. Washington St., Highland Ave. vs. Highland St., Oxford Ave. vs. Oxford St., and Wyman St. vs. Wyman Rd. Life in Cambridge is just so difficult.

Luxury Seating
Order #9. Eliminating Hostile Architecture.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui
Charter Right – Nolan

Methinks the sponsors of this Order (and the activists who inspire them) wouldn’t know the difference between hostile and helpful.

Cambridge City Council on Hallucinogens
Order #10. That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to direct city staff to work with the City’s state and federal partners in support of decriminalizing all Entheogenic Plants and plant-based compounds.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern
Order Adopted 8-1 (Toomey – NO)

This Order may actually explain a lot about the behavior of the Cambridge City Council. Perhaps when the pandemic winds down they can decorate the Sullivan Chamber with Peter Max posters and pipe in some Donovan songs like "Mellow Yellow" and "Sunshine Superman". Bringing back black lights would also be a nice touch.

Carrots or Sticks
Committee Report #1. Health & Environment Committee met on Aug 11, 2020 meet to discuss the Net Zero Action Plan FY20 progress report and to receive a general update on the plan including the upcoming 5-year review process.
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Greater efficiency is always a good thing, but incentives are always better than mandates when it comes to private homes. I don’t think enough councillors fully understand this. – Robert Winters

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress