Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

April 14, 2025

The Proposed New Cambridge Charter – For Better or Worse – April 14, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

The Proposed New Cambridge Charter – For Better or Worse – April 14, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

My taxes are almost done (yeah, I never get an early start), and the City Council meets on the eve of Tax Day. Here are the agenda items that distracted me this week:Peoples Republic of Cambridge

Money Talks

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Federal update.
pulled by Nolan; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang re: Harvard President Alan Garber’s announcement to not cooperate w/threats from Trump Administration, courage of students and others in standing up to administration; cancellation of federal grants, breach of order by federal government, positions terminated, programs cut or eliminated (such as LIHEAP), danger of the coming years, confronting the federal government; comments by Nolan, Siddiqui (asks about Volpe, no word yet); Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge FY2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Claire Spinner (Finance), Joseph McCann (Auditor), Robert Mahoney (independent audit consultant), Zusy, Simmons; Placed on File 9-0


Talking about Transportation

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-67 regarding Cambridge Bicycle Plan Update and Consideration of Network Connections. (CM25#82) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Brooke McKenna (TPT), Stephanie Groll (Transportation Planning – now part of Transportation Department), Toner (on how CSO might be modified), Owen O’Riordan (looking at all modes of traffic, achieving a high degree of consensus), Zusy, Wilson (wants more details in spelling out the “network”, EW routes vs. NS routes; McKenna talks about the 2015 process and “vision”, calls NS routes “low speed, low volume” vs. EW routes “requiring” separation; Wilson asks how Broadway became included in current plan, McKenna says it was added in the 2020 plan; Nick Schmidt (new pedestrian and bicycle program manager) introduced; McKenna says development of the Network Vision independent of the Cycling Safety Ordinance, claims there was a public process [Is that really true? – I don’t recall there be any such process.]; Wilson addresses broader concerns re: CSO and needs of actual people; McGovern says Main Street was not part of the Ordinance, McKenna says the Ordinance calls for 25 miles, some streets (the “special four”) specified, says Brattle Street and Main Street “essential” to be added to network; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-23 regarding a Citywide Shuttle Bus Pilot program. (CM25#84) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Toner, Zusy, Siddiqui, Brooke McKenna; Referred to both Neighborhood & Long-Range Planning Committee and Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee held a public hearing on Mon, Mar 17, 2025 with MIT transportation experts and City staff to brainstorm ways to better accommodate mobility for all users as we continue to promote the use of sustainable modes. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (McGovern – Absent)


This and That

Order #1. City Council opposition to Federal efforts to defund or censor museums.   Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Nolan; comments by Simmons, Nolan; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #2. That the City Council go on record declaring Earth Day, April 22 in the year 2025 “Sustainable Cambridge Day” and that the City Manager is requested to communicate to all City departments the City’s commitment to our climate goals and the need to support the efforts of the Sustainable Cambridge initiative.   Councillor Nolan, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Nolan for comments; Order Adopted 9-0

Charter Right #1. Continued funding of the Transitional Wellness Center. [Charter Right – Toner, Apr 7, 2025]
McGovern proposed amendment Adopted 7-0-0-2 (Azeem, Zusy – Present); Toner notes Human Services Committee meeting on this topic, Manager was clear about lack of funding for continued operation; City Manager Huang comments on Cambridge many investments for unhoused communities, fact that this proposed expenditure would add considerable expense and City is already opening permanent supporting housing; Toner, Zusy to vote No while acknowledging good services provided by the TWC; McGovern challenges Zusy unnecessarily, gets agitated suggesting he’ll just bring this up again, suggests false choices between this and trees and other matters, calls his colleagues statements “shameful”; Sobrinho-Wheeler supports the Order and suggests lack of prioritization process, wants the City Council to take more control of the Budget process (bad idea); Nolan notes that there is a lot of desire to fund everything, but it’s unfair to shame each other on financial and other decisions, does not agree with referring this to Finance Committee; Simmons expresses concerns about promoting a program that is not well run; Wilson will vote Yes on the proposal; McGovern comments; Yi-An Huang notes that if we had no resources there would be no hard choices, and some (limited) funding creates environment where priorities must be set and choices must be made, and further notes that federal cuts can affect local choices, each year’s budget feeds into the next year’s budget; McGovern again suggests that this should be a priority in addition to other pet projects like municipal broadband; Siddiqui suggests rethinking the Wednesday’s Finance Committee meeting agenda, continues to promote her own “Rise Up” local welfare program; Azeem notes simultaneous expiration of ARPA funding and losses in federal funding, asks when any decisions re: Spaulding program must be made; Ellen Semonoff says a date is difficult to determine – there are 22 people still at TWC, and the longer people stay based on possibility of extension the more likely they may find themselves with no next step, notes that if TWC does not close now it will be more difficult to do so in the future; City Manager notes that funding TWC will make it more difficult to fund a successor program to the “Rise Up” local welfare program; Nolan additional comments re: many proposed projects; McGovern objects to suggestion of vouchers vs. TWC; Order Adopted as Amended 5-4; Reconsideration Fails 0-9
[My own personal opinion is that this entire conversation is proof positive why it would be a terrible idea to have legislators wrest more control over city management with the goal of promoting specific (often politically motivated) projects – the essential definition of political patronage – which can sometimes produce good benefits, but often not. I will add that if some of the current councillors could have their way, property taxes would soar, especially in light of recent news regarding Kendall Square commercial property challenges and their tax levy implications.]

Only 279 Communications this week. One, in particular, stood out above all the others:

Communication #208. Patrick W Barrett III, re: PO25#49. [text of communication]

Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Wed, Mar 5, 2025 to receive an update on the state of the arts in Cambridge and discuss how the City is currently supporting artists and art organizations through grant programs and funding, with a focus on the Central Square Cultural district. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (McGovern – Absent)


The Cambridge Charter

Committee Report #3. The Cambridge City Council’s Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review was held on Fri, Mar 28, 2025 to review the communication from the City Solicitor with updates in the Charter review process that was referred from the Mar 17, 2025 City Council meeting. [text of report]
Rules Suspended to take up early along with Comm & Reports #2 and #3; Siddiqui thanks all involved; Toner comments; March 28, 2025 revisions voted Adopted 9-0; Committee Report Placed on File 9-0; Comm. & Reports #2 Placed on File 9-0 (superseded by ; City Solicitor Megan Bayer walks through changes in latest Draft; Siddiqui motion to accept latest changes Adopted 9-0; comments by Nolan re: Charter Review Committee; Sobrinho-Wheeler addresses removal procedures, McKenna notes state law regarding conviction of felony and removal upon sentencing (as was the case with former Councillor William Walsh in 1994); Zusy on review of ordinances every decade, Mayer responds [Note: They used to be not only reviewed but frequently published as a bound volume], McKenna notes that existing ordinances would be a 6 inch wide bound volume; Simmons speaks on half of School Committee member Caroline Hunter re: role of the Mayor on the School Committee; McGovern remarks on review of ordinances suggesting that the period of review be baked into the ordinance language itself; Wilson expresses gratitude to Law Department and Charter Review Committee, how to put into practice the review of ordinances, Bayer notes this would be a significant undertaking; Megan Bayer notes that many City departments are affected by ordinances and that they should be involved in their review; Siddiqui acknowledges Clerk’s Office, notes many CRC recommendation that have been referred to Government Operations for future consideration; McGovern says Gov’t Operations meetings will be scheduled; Toner asks if charter review must be done every 10 years or does clock start w/adoption of any revision, Bayer notes that it would be every 10 years (in a year ending in a ”2”); Home Rule Petition Adopted 9-0

Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from City Solicitor Megan B. Bayer, transmitting an update regarding Revised Charter Draft including Home Rule Draft.
Placed on File 9-0 (superseded by late communication below)

Communications & Reports #3. A communication was received from City Solicitor Megan B. Bayer, transmitting – Updated City Charter Revised Charter Draft.
Placed on File 9-0; Home Rule Petition Adopted 9-0

Late Order #3. That the City Council approve the motions that passed favorably in the Special Committee of the Whole/Charter Review on March 28, 2025.   Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#55)
Order Adopted 9-0

Late Order #4. That the Council accept the new additional changes as detailed that the Law Department has made that the Special Committee did not vote on.   Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#56)
Order Adopted 9-0

Late Order #5. That the City Council petition the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to enact the attached home rule petition entitled, AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE; provided, that the Legislature may make such incidental changes necessary to effectuate passage of this petition.   Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui (PO25#57)
Order Adopted 9-0

Late Order #6. That the City Council request that State Rep. Marjorie Decker sponsor the home rule petition entitled AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE.   Councillor Siddiqui
Nolan amends to have rest of delegation invited, Siddiqui very truculent in response; Amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (McGovern – Absent); Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (McGovern – Absent)

This has been a long haul, and not such a pleasant one. On the bright side, there won’t be any major changes to the general framework of Cambridge municipal government. We’ll still have a city manager form of government with all at-large elections conducted via proportional representation with some added flexibility for the Election Commission to slightly modify the tabulation methods (the one thing I wanted to see for many years). The City Council will continue to choose their own Chair (the Mayor), but the Mayor will serve as an ordinary member of the School Committee with its Chair being elected by the School Committee (something I suggested over 20 years ago). Also, I was finally heard regarding the matter of keeping intact the current mechanisms for Resident Initiative Petitions and Referenda (which the City Council had originally eliminated). The updating of the language and overall structure of the proposed Charter is also a worthwhile change.

On the negative side (for starters): (a) the selection of the original Charter Review Committee was tainted and driven by the whims of the Mayor at that time; (b) the current penalties under the Plan E Charter for City Council interference (not acting through the City Manager) were eliminated (a very bad thing); and (c) at every step the City Council insisted on greater control of budgetary matters, board appointments, and more. I can only speculate how the whole procedure may have been different (and probably better) had there been an actual Charter Commission – as opposed to having only incumbent city councillors having any say regarding any changes in the structure our municipal government.

Assuming the posted draft of the new Charter is approved by the City Council, it will then have to be reviewed by the Attorney General and the Home Rule Petition will have to be approved by the State Legislature. If all that takes place, it will then come back to the voters of Cambridge – optimistically in time for the November 2025 election, but it could potentially be further delayed. – Robert Winters

April 4, 2025

Tending the Garden (Street) – April 7, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

Tending the Garden (Street) – April 7, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

Yellow

Light Blue

Not that you could ever tell from the scandalous focus of the local tabloids, but the Big Issue residents are hotly debating now is whether the Garden Street road configuration should stay or go. Beyond the sideshows and the political posturing and opportunism, here are a few things of interest on this week’s agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Cambridge Public Schools’ long-term facilities condition assessment. [text of report]
pulled by Wilson; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang, Interim School Superintendent David Murphy, Councillors Wilson, Nolan, Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern; Placed on File 9-0


Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a proposed amendment to the Drought Ordinance. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; Unfinished Business #4 brought forward; Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, relative to Cambridge Municipal Code 13.08, Water System Regulations and Chapter 13.12, Water Reservoirs. [Passed to 2nd Reading Mar 24, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained Apr 7, 2025] [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; Ordained as Amended 9-0


Order #1. That the City Council send a formal invitation to Mr. Gerald Chan to come before the Economic Development and University Relations Committee to answer questions and present his plans for the Harvard Square Movie Theater, as well as his other vacant properties in the City.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by McGovern (paradoxically endorsing nostalgia and preservation while simultaneously endorsing wholesale changes in built environment); comments by Siddiqui re: legal imitations in what Council can do; comments by Wilson, Simmons; Toner proposes amendment to bring in 23 other vacant storefront owners; Zusy supports amendment, wants to extend to other property owners but without shaming; McGovern OK with amendment but expects this will take several meetings, dismisses suggestion that this is “shaming”; Zusy suggests that singling out one property owner not ideal, there are broader considerations; Amendment Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on Tues, Mar 11, 2025 with the City Solicitor and the Community Development Department, Economic Opportunity Division, to discuss concerns with vacant store fronts and commercial properties in Cambridge, and prior efforts and possible options such as new policies, taxes, and/or fines to reduce the number of vacant store fronts and commercial properties in Cambridge. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0


Order #2. Continued funding of the Transitional Wellness Center.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by McGovern with some history of funding for this facility; Sobrinho-Wheeler advocates for keeping it open beyond ARPA funding; Wilson comments; Yi-An Huang notes current funding is ~$3 million/year which would likely rise, contracts would need to be extended, more information for these and similar services will be forthcoming; Charter Right – Toner


Charter Right #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-68 re: Garden Street two-way traffic alternatives. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mar 31, 2025] [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler (JSW) along with Charter Right #3; Placed on File 9-0

Charter Right #3. That the City Manager and appropriate staff move forward with Option 4 to reopen Garden Street to two-way traffic while maintaining separated bike lanes. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mar 31, 2025]
pulled by Toner along with Charter Right #1; JSW proposed amendment by substitution calling for more analysis and not moving forward with Option #4; Toner expresses appreciation for JSW amendment but wants to move forward with 2-way preference; Nolan notes that there have already been many changes to other road redesigns, supports bi-directional bike lanes as safest alternative; Siddiqui aligns w/JSW; Azeem agrees w/JSW amendment and focuses on cost of different options; TPT Director Brooke McKenna suggests estimated cost of Option #4 to be $137,000 with timeline of Summer 2026, additional costs associated w/utilities; Azeem uses cost to rationalize making no changes; Zusy suggests that JSW amendment would just be “kicking the can down the road”, need to take a vote on this now and resolve outstanding issues re: loading zones, etc.; Wilson appreciates spirit of JSW amendment, notes that these issues are city-wide pinning neighbors against each other, making movement across the city difficult, insufficient outreach to those affected; McGovern notes dissatisfaction of some neighbors but wants to keep current configuration; JSW Amendment Fails 4-5 (BA,MM,SS,JSW-Yes; PN,PT,AW,CZ,DS-No); Toner notes that some will be unhappy either way, resounding push-back after restricting to 1-way; Nolan notes that many came out in support for Option #1 (keep 1-way) due to organized effort, speaks in support of bi-directional bike lanes, notes $50 million on Mass. Ave. due to provision of bike lanes; Zusy notes that while TPT reports were rational there is also need for safety for drivers and not just cyclists, 42,000 registered vehicles and Garden Street a strongly preferred route for hundreds of years, rollover accidents caused by current configuration, school-related traffic increases anticipated; Siddiqui says safety data supports Option #1, but McKenna says crash analysis has not been done, acknowledges increase in rollover crashes but does not ascribe cause; McKenna notes potential congestion problems (which is interesting in that the TPT position has been in favor of congestion in that it leads to reduced speeds); Yi-An Huang notes that bike lane debates among most contentious in many communities, notes the many trade-offs; Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan notes thought given by TPT in regard to Garden Street and other streets where road configurations are planned, notes that all four options provide safe passage for all users; Wilson comments on difficult and divisive conversation, notes similar shifting points of view in Cambridge and other communities, fact that there have been fatalities last year – all on roads with separated bike lanes; JSW notes that if Option #4 is chosen there are limited means to provide replacement parking or loading zones (which didn’t seem to be a concern for the Mass. Ave. bike lanes); McGovern expresses concerns about the “pendulum” of changing back and forth, acknowledges complaints about Brattle Street bi-directional bike lanes; McKenna notes concerns about people not looking both ways when crossing bi-directional bike lanes; Simmons motion to end debate Prevails 8-1 (SS-No); Order (to move forward w/Option #4 – 2-way operation of Garden Street) Adopted 5-4 (PN,PT,AW,CZ,DS-Yes; BA,MM,SS,JSW-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9
Note: The notion that the City Council should not be making decisions on road configurations that would revert Garden Street to 2-way traffic is ironic to say the least. The entire (amended) Cycling Safety Ordinance that mandated specific treatments for specific roads was based on this same sort of “political traffic engineering”. It seems pretty clear to many of us that this level of micromanagement is fundamentally problematic, and it is, in fact, the rigidity of the timelines that were established in the Ordinance that have created all of this mess. I will add that this entire topic is mainly about “winning” for the Cambridge Bike Safety group.

656 Communications – almost all of which have to do with Garden Street bike lanes and parking, plus a lesser number having to do with (a) Half-Crown Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District (and ABC’s never-ending quest to bulldoze Cambridge history), and (b) “Our squares and corridors”. There were relatively few about the Councillor Toner situation, and opinions varied widely. Clearly, bike lanes and the built environment (including glass houses) are higher on the list of resident priorities.


Late Order #4. That the City Council formally go on record to urge, in the strongest possible terms, the Harvard Corporation to stand up in defense of the values that are fundamental to both the University and our democracy; and that the City Manager be and hereby is requested to act with urgency and coordinate a response and consult with all relevant city, regional, and state entities to develop a united front and take all action possible to counter this assault on the foundational values of our city as a center of higher learning.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Mayor Simmons (PO25#52)
Comments by Nolan; Yi-An Huang remarks noting centuries-old relationship between Harvard and Cambridge, need to stand up to Trump Administration and their unlawful actions; Simmons and all councillors ask to be added as sponsors and that this be also directed to our legislative delegation; Siddiqui notes Globe opinion article by Niko Bowie and Benjamin Edelson entitled “Harvard’s Moment of Truth”; McGovern comments re: “vindictive bullies” (irony noted); Azeem asks about what actions City could take; Yi-An Huang notes that having City Council on record is important, ongoing meetings with the Harvard Corporation, action of taking a $750 million bond to ensure liquidity in the event of shut-off of federal funding, growing set of faculty and alumni speaking up, “there is a voice of truth and integrity that needs to come out”; Nolan amendment Adopted as Amended 9-0

February 10, 2025

The Other Shoe Drops – February 10, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

The Other Shoe Drops – February 10, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

It should be noted that this Regular City Council meeting will be preceded by a 3:00pm Special Meeting relating to negotiations to extend the contract of City Manager Yi-An Huang. Public comment will permitted at that meeting prior to going into Executive Session.

The Big Items (other than any developments on the City Manager’s contract) are the inevitable ordination of the ill-begotten Multi-Family Housing zoning (better characterized as the Gargantuan Upzoning Amendment) and an Order to move ahead on Municipal Broadband – regardless of cost.

Here are the items on the Regular Meeting that drew my attention this week:City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Cambridge Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan final adoption. (CM25#26) [text of report and Order]
Order Adopted, Placed on File 9-0

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to create a plan with a schedule and milestones to move forward with the creation of a Municipal Broadband Network and present it for consideration by the Council at a Finance Committee meeting in the context of capital projects for coming years.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by JSW dismissing concerns about feasibility claiming much consultation with City officials; Nolan notes that service would not be free, says this Order in not a mandate to move forward, notes importance of net neutrality, says this is a necessary utility, calls it a manageable investment; Toner notes opposition due to range of “Whereas” statements, $150-250 million cost and changing technologies, other ways to address Internet equity; McGovern says he has been supportive of this, but notes different financial circumstances now, refers to “Trump-Musk administration” and federal cuts, proposes amendment to strike to “to move forward to the creation…” clause; Zusy concurs re: current financial circumstances, notes other ways digital equity is being addressed; Siddiqui OK with amendment; Wilson says conversation is important; Simmons says affordable Internet now not a luxury but a necessity, need for greater digital equity, notes that proposal doesn’t assure lower cost; McGovern amendment to remove “to move forward” Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (Toner-No)

Though I have no strong feelings on Municipal Broadband, I am aware of the significant costs associated with it as well as the risks and uncertainty of moving forward on an infrastructure proposal in an environment where emerging technologies may make this obsolete. I am also reminded of the various meetings and presentations on the tax levy over the last year and the repeated advice that the City needs to be more fiscally prudent in the near term. Perhaps Councillors Sobrinho-Wheeler, Siddiqui, Nolan, and Wilson didn’t get the memo. Or maybe this is being introduced strategically right now as the City Manager’s contract extension is being negotiated. Or maybe it’s just another municipal election year bauble to be dangled in front of the electorate even though there is little or no indication that this will yield any cost savings for consumers. For the record, I deeply dislike Comcast/Xfinity – but mainly because of the crappy Cable TV options which, by the way, never enter into the discussions about Municipal Broadband.


Unfinished Business #1. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Ordinance 2025 #1 Multi-family Zoning Petition-Part 1. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Amended Feb 3, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025; Expires Feb 17, 2025] (ORD25#1) [Final Version as Ordained]
pulled by Azeem; Azeem amendment to footnote as suggested by CDD staff Adopted 9-0; McGovern amendment re: required abutters meeting that would have required notification to Planning Boards in adjacent towns (not viewable in recording of meeting); Nolan comments on electronic notification; McGovern amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (Toner-Absent); Zusy comments on this proposal producing most luxury units, raised real estate values, displacement, and other negative outcomes, suggests delaying this or reconsidering “3+3” alternative and establish funding mechanisms, community land trust; Azeem praises himself and Siddiqui; Siddiqui calls this her “birthday present”, suggests even more aggressive changes and “being intentional”, dismisses concerns of others as “fear of change”; McGovern addresses concern about “luxury units” and that target population is people who make too much money to be eligible for Inclusionary Housing units, calls this “good government”; Toner concurs and acknowledges that many people will be upset with his vote in favor, dismisses concerns about over-building on small lots, wants to now move forward on Squares and Corridors; Wilson emphasizes “crisis”, says she preferred “3+3” alternative; Nolan credits herself for initializing process for eliminating single-family zoning, says she preferred “3+3” alternative claiming it would have yielded more units and more affordability; Sobrinho-Wheeler notes that all current single-family housing sell for at least $1.5 million, says this change will yield 60% of all new buildings having affordable units; Simmons notes long process and suggests this will yield affordability for generations, says “leadership means making difficult choices”, says Squares and Corridors, housing vouchers next targets, says “we are a role model”; Petition Ordained as Amended 8-1 (Zusy-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Unfinished Business #2. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to ORDINANCE 2025 #2 Multi-family Zoning Petition-Part 2. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025; Expires Feb 17, 2025] (ORD25#2) [Final Version as Ordained]
pulled by Azeem; Petition Ordained as Amended 8-1 (Zusy-No); Reconsideration Fails 0-9

Late Order #6. That the City Manager direct the Community Development Department and Law Department to draft an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would make the provisions of Section 11.207.5.2.1, Paragraph (e), which allow qualified increases in building height under the Affordable Housing Overlay, not applicable in the Residence C-1 district.   Councillor Toner (PO25#16)
Late Order Adopted 9-0

Other than the allowance of multi-family housing in all residential districts (which is not controversial), I think this gargantuan zoning change is a huge mistake. The existence of varying heights and densities in different parts of Cambridge is a feature – not a bug. I am also acutely aware of the value of setbacks and access – especially in regard to fire safety. Sometimes I think some of our city councillors are just robots created as part of an MIT project – programmed to solve some maximum packing problem set with no sense of aesthetics, liveability, or community. Meanwhile, the activists promise benefits like cheaper rents and lower costs that will most likely never be realized – at least not as a result of these zoning changes. Sometimes the call of “crisis” is just a tool to ram things through – both nationally and locally.

Committee Report #1. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee held a public hearing on Jan 28, 2025 to discuss inter-jurisdictional projects that are in play that may impact mobility in Cambridge. The discussion was focused on the Community Development Department’s report of Nov 14, 2024 to the City Council, Awaiting Report 24-36. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I attended this meeting primarily to alert the councillors (at least those who actually listen) to some alternative approaches to pedestrian and bicycle-friendly crossings of the Charles River.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with appropriate departments to prepare a communication to DCR Commissioner Arrigo, urging that a study of traffic conditions at the intersections of Western Avenue and River Street at Memorial Drive and Soldiers Field Road (commonly referred to as “the box”), be included in their FY26 Capital Plan.   Councillor Zusy, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0

This was one of the priorities discussed at the above meeting. Many of the current crop of activists only see merit in lane reductions and obstructions that make automobile use as difficult as possible. Reality sometimes has to intervene. – RW

February 5, 2025

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 641-642: February 4, 2025

Episode 641 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 4, 2025 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Feb 4, 2025 at 6:00pm. Topics: Broadway fire, importance of setbacks for fire safety and access; Multi-family Housing Zoning (a.k.a. Bigger Cambridge Zoning), concerns about heights, density, setbacks, stairwells, elevators; bad planning in crisis mentality; Broadway bike lane controversy, restrictions on emergency vehicles, misinformation about bike safety, importance of visibility; bulldozing Cambridge history; misguided leftist opposition to surveillance for police work, unsolved murders; Alewife MBTA excavation; $65K appropriation for Bisesquicentennial; appointments to “Broadway Safety Improvement Project” Working Group. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 642 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 4, 2025 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Feb 4, 2025 at 6:30pm. Topics: Hostility of some city councillors; advocate says only people with driveways should own cars; rumors of DSA strong mayor ballot question; history on nonpartisan municipal elections, drifting back to the dark ages; Sanctuary City or Welcoming City concerns, inability of federal government to address immigration; PILOT agreements, political hunger to fund pet programs; delegating curb cut authority to staff; Neville Center refinancing; notable passings; City Charter proposals re: budget control, appointing City Solicitor, direct election of mayor, 4-year City Council terms, Council approval of department heads, diminishing citizen redress and prohibitions against interference, need for better mechanism for accountability within City departments. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 3, 2025

Trumping History – February 3, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

Trumping History – February 3, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

City Hall - PaigeBarring divine intervention, the ordination of The Bigger Cambridge Zoning is expected to happen next week (Feb 10) after being passed to a 2nd Reading at last week’s meeting. Having experienced a building fire this past Thursday just 10 feet from my house on Broadway, I have never felt the need for space between buildings more than I do right now. Urban planning in Cambridge is being steadily eclipsed by the urge to pack everything closer and stack everything higher. On the bright side, I suspect more than a few residents who rarely vote in local elections may have a change of heart this year now that new building heights and densities may soon be doubling or tripling in their neighborhoods.

Last week the second meeting of the “Special Committee of the Whole” looked at some of the more fringy proposals from some of the more fringy councillors. They dropped the proposal to double City Council terms from 2 years to 4 years when they heard some of the negative aspects that they should have understood all along had they been actually paying attention. The proposal to expand City Council authority in the City Budget process was soundly bashed by City staff, but its chief advocate (Sobrinho-Wheeler, DSA-Cambridge) chose to strategically withdraw it for possible revision rather than see it go down in flames. The proposal to have Department Head appointments be subject to City Council approval was mercifully put to sleep, but there will be another meeting on Feb 13 to continue discussion of some of the other problematic proposals. What they do after that is anyone’s guess, but I hope they will at least take a second look at the mechanisms for citizen redress as well as what appears to be a drastically watered down version of the Plan E prohibition of city councillors going around the city manager to direct or pressure City staff.

As for this week’s meeting, here are some things of possible interest:

Manager’s Agenda #1, #2, #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Surveillance Technology Impact Report (STIR). [#1 – Automated License Plate Recognition; #2 – Locked Cellular Device Access Software; #3 – Remotely Piloted Aerial Vehicle] (CM25#9)
pulled by Toner noting that these have already been through Public Safety Committee; Police Commissioner Christine Elow, Dept. Supt. John Boyle explain; Toner notes how drones may have been helpful in Faisal case, asks about circumstances when information gathered might be shared outside CPD; Boyle explains; Toner highlights unsolved murders and hesitancy of some people to come forward with information, trust in CPD; Zusy concurs with Toner, asks about use of surveillance in LA and in NYC, concerns about federal overreach; Elow explains how we have been at a deficit w/o these technologies, need to ask community with cameras, agrees that timing couldn’t be worse with new administration; City Solicitor Megan Bayer notes how policy is to protect residents in line with Welcoming City Ordinance; Yi-An Huang notes when it is appropriate to work with federal agencies in criminal investigations; Zusy asks about use of technologies to monitor protests; Boyle emphasizes that these would not be used to restrict speech but to monitor effects on traffic; Azeem comments, especially re: sharing of information; Megan Bayer explains about license plate recording and redaction of information; Azeem asks about “Proud Boys” illustration (suggesting that he would be OK with sharing info on some organizations but not others) and about joint investigation of extremist groups; Elow notes need for probable cause; Huang objects to these hypotheticals; McGovern notes that as a privileged white male he would not be subject to surveillance; Sobrinho-Wheeler says that only concept of surveillance was discussed at Public Safety Committee, wants to refer all 3 reports to Public Safety for further discussion; Huang notes uncertain times but says drone footage not high priority, real priority in keeping community safe; Wilson notes loss of friends to gun violence and how some technology might have been helpful in solving these crimes; Wilson motion to accept reports on license plate identification and cell phone data access; Siddiqui objects to Wilson motions, suggests that technology use overly broad, objects to use of drones; Nolan has concerns about drones, wants ACLU in conversation; Elow offers example of how technology would be used; Simmons offers additional explanation; Huang notes use of license plate readers to capture places in and out of the city; Nolan questions re: access to phones; Simmons notes Charlene Moore, Anthony Clay, Xavier Louis-Jacques murders and difficulty in bringing murder charges, reality that cameras and other technologies are already all around us, disproportionate effect of violence on Black and Brown communities and need to bring those most affected into conversation; Motion to approve license plate readers, cell phones access and to refer use of drones to Public Safety Committee Adopted 6-3 (BA,MM,PT,AW,CZ,DS – Yes; PN,SS,JSW – No)

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-69 regarding asbestos concerns with the MBTA’s Alewife construction. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins, Zusy, Sam Lipson (Senior Director of Environmental Health); Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $65,000 to be allocated to the Grant Fund Public Celebrations Other Ordinary Maintenance Account. This grant will support activities focused on the themes of revolution and independence, celebrating the significant historical milestones that have taken place in Cambridge.
Order Adopted 9-0

“This grant will support activities focused on the themes of revolution and independence, celebrating the significant historical milestones that have taken place in Cambridge.” … “Events will take place from April through June 2025, with a marketing campaign beginning in February.”

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of members of the Broadway Street Safety Improvement Project Working Group.
pulled by Zusy – notes timing of these appointments after most conclusions already made, imbalance of appointments tilted toward cycling advocates; Jeff Parenti (TPT) says Cycling Safety Ordinance dictates most except for finer details, esp. use of side streets to make up for loss of parking (which is beyond ridiculous from point of view of resident parking); Parenti deflects concerns about representativeness of the committee; Zusy suggests there should have been a commercial representative on the committee, lot of concern from residents about loss of parking, asks about use of parking lots (which is essentially irrelevant for Broadway); Owen O’Riordan notes recent amendments to TPDM ordinance; Wilson asks how many applications were received (over 30), also has concerns about representativeness of the appointments; Parenti says you don’t want too few or too many people on the committee; Wilson wants to hear from all people; Toner suggests mailing to all property owners w/parking lots (which is a deflection and fails to not potential exorbitant cost); Nolan notes limitations on what the committee can affect (the implication being that there will be no changes to the CSO); Appointments Approved, Placed on File 9-0

First, it’s just “Broadway”, not “Broadway Street”. We’ll see how this advisory process goes, but what many residents of Mid-Cambridge really want is to simply remove Broadway from the list of streets to be reconfigured in this manner, and that tide is rising.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to prepare a report on the use of M.G.L. Ch. 40U to determine which local statutes can be enforced by the local-option procedure in order to better collect fines in violation of Cambridge ordinances and provide a recommendation to the City Council for implementation of Ch. 40U procedures.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toner, Councillor Zusy
Order Adopted 9-0

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to install “Bicycles Must Yield” signs along the Linear Park Parkway, Russell Field, Cambridge Commons, and any other shared use pathway determined appropriate by the City Manager and staff. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Jan 27, 2025]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler w/concerns about staff capacity and who would be putting up/removing (A-frame) signs; Jeff Parenti would prefer to not deal with these and to use only fixed metal signs (Share the Path; Keep Right); Toner, Nolan, Zusy, Wilson supportive of improved signage; Azeem asks what exactly would change; Owen O’Riordan explains; Order Adopted 8-1 (JSW-No)

Charter Right #2. Condolences to the family of Janet Rose. [Charter Right – Simmons, Jan 27, 2025]
Resolution Adopted as Amended by Substitution 9-0

Charter Right #3. That the City Council Amend Petition One, Section 5.40, Footnote (2) to add paragraph (c) to read: (c) If the building does not require a Planning Board Advisory Consultation per Section 19.40 of this Zoning Ordinance and does not require any special permit from the Planning Board, then before applying for a building permit, the applicant shall schedule an in-person or virtual meeting to answer questions and gather feedback from abutters and shall prepare a notification including, at a minimum, a general description of the project, the date, time, location, and other information necessary for people to attend the meeting, and contact information (telephone and e-mail, at minimum) for the developer and shall provide that notification by mail to abutters, owners of land directly opposite on any public or private street or way, and abutters to the abutters within three hundred feet of the property line of the lot, and to others whom the applicant may choose to contact, and shall include with the building permit application a copy of the notification and mailing list, a summary of the meeting, who attended, and what questions and feedback were received. [Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler, Jan 27, 2025] [amended text]
taken up with Unfinished Business #4; McGovern comments, motion to amend by substitution; Nolan also proposes amendment; comments by Jeff Roberts (CDD); Zusy suggests that is neighborhood associations can do hybrid meetings then developers should also be able to do so; Simmons, Toner, Wilson comments – keep it simple; Nolan amendment Adopted 9-0; Megan Bayer clarifies language; Simmons comments; Sobrinho-Wheeler amendment to allow online notifications Adopted 9-0; Megan Bayer notes that this amendment is a new footnote to proposed ordinance; City Clerk LeBlanc clarifies votes; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0; Additional Amendment to add footnote #37 and to strike previous amendment 9-0; Zusy asks about proposal change 75′ height to 74′ height in Res. C-1 districts (due to AHO concerns) and to have 40% open space requirement (up from 30%), at least half permeable, for buildings over 75,000 sq ft; Toner seeks examples of where these apply; Jeff Roberts, Melissa Peters explain; JSW concerned about how this might affect unit count; Simmons withdraws this for now.

Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Ordinance 2025 #1 Multifamily Zoning Petition-Part 1. [Passed to 2nd Reading Jan 27, 2025; Eligible to be Ordained Feb 10, 2025] (ORD25#1) [amended text]
taken up with Charter Right #3; Amended 9-0

The general trend with recent City Councils is to limit most neighborhood and abutter feedback on development proposals and, in the case of the AHO to eliminate or greatly limit the roles of the Planning Board and BZA. They see the book “Neighborhood Defenders” as the last word and that all feedback is inherently NIMBYism. My sense is that if Sobrinho-Wheeler and several others could have their way, the only permissible objections would be from renters.

205 Communications: 73 pro-upzoning, 106 opposed, 15 for the “3+3” alternative (Councillor Wilson commented last week that “the community” supports the “3+3” proposal – based on what exactly?), and 11 others on various topics.

Resolution #4. Congratulations to Robyn Culbertson on the occasion of her retirement as Executive Director of the Office for Tourism.   Mayor Simmons

Committee Report #1. The Finance Committee and Housing Committee held a joint public hearing on July 10, 2024 to review and discuss the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust and to discuss the City’s relationship with the Trust, consider funding priorities, and ways to fund affordable housing development in Cambridge. [text of report]
Comments by Nolan – meeting recessed, now closed, possible future meetings on topic; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

December 10, 2024

It’s Beginning to Look A Lot Like 2016 Again – December 9, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

It’s Beginning to Look A Lot Like 2016 Again – December 9, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Peoples RepublicIt seems like Deja Vu all over again. As I was grabbing links to past Sanctuary City resolutions, I stumbled upon my notes from the Nov 21, 2016 City Council meeting. Some of the agenda items were strikingly similar to this week’s agenda – both, of course, in the context of a forthcoming Trump presidency. [Sanctuary City references: 1985, 2006, 2016 and 2020; and now this]

Note: There was a meeting of the Special Committee on Charter Review earlier in the day at which a long list of proposed Charter amendments were either recommended, dismissed, held over until the next meeting or referred to the Government Operations Committee for possible separate action.

Here are the items that seemed interesting to me this week:

Boards & Commissions

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Zhonghe Li and Jean Dany Joachim and the re-appointment of David Daniel, Aliyah Gary, Lori Lander, Calvin Lindsay Jr., Ann Lawson, Stella Aguirre McGregor, Michael Monestime, Diane Charyk Norris, Katherine Megumi Shozawa and Christine Lamas Weinberg to the Cambridge Arts Advisory Board for a term of three years.
Appointments Approved; Placed on File 9-0

Resolution #1. Congratulations to CHA Board Commissioner Gerard J. Clark on his retirement.   Mayor Simmons


Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-24, regarding a Porchfest pilot. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Jason Weeks, Simmons, Wilson; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority Affordable Homeownership Commitment. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0


Transportation and, of course, bikes

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the proposed Bluebike bike share system contract term.
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Yi-An Huang, Stephanie Groll, Wilson, Simmons, Megan Bayer; Order Adopted 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department and Harvard University to restore Garden Street to two-way automobile traffic while preserving two-way protected bike lanes, preserving as much parking on and/or near Garden Street as possible and identifying potential areas for resident parking on neighboring streets and communicating the changes to the affected neighborhood.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Zusy, Nolan, Wilson, Yi-An Huang, McGovern, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Azeem, Siddiqui, Owen O’Riordan; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-61, regarding lowering speeds on state highways. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Jeff Parenti, Brooke McKenna; Order Adopted 9-0


Can you give me sanctuary?

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to forward a letter to all Cambridge organizations working with immigrant populations, as well as all City Departments, reminding them of the city’s Sanctuary/Trust Act City status, the protections provided by the 2020 Welcoming Community Ordinance, and the importance of ensuring non-citizens are treated with dignity and respect.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toner (PO24#154)
pulled by McGovern; comments by McGovern, Siddiqui, Nolan, Wilson, Simmons; Order Amended to add all councillors; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0


On The Table #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments and encourage the state Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the MBTA to adhere to Cambridge local ordinances, including the Cambridge Asbestos Protection Ordinance, during Alewife Construction. [Tabled Nov 25, 2024]
Removed from Table 9-0; comments by Nolan; Order Adopted 9-0

Resolution #3. Recognition of Cambridge Investment in Renewable Energy.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled for comments by Nolan

8 Committee Reports – 7 from previous City Council terms
Reports Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #2. A communication from Councillor Siddiqui and Councillor Toner, transmitting an update on the Special Committee on Charter Review.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

November 19, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 635-636: November 19, 2024

Episode 635 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 19, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Nov 19, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Post-election recap, insane campaign spending, strange Cabinet choices; possible ramifications for sanctuary cities”, possible effects on federal funds, housing eligibility, transportation projects, effect on property tax levy to compensate; misunderstanding democracy, people staying in their respective silos; the Moulton reaction and refusal to moderate; Resident Satisfaction Survey – what it says and doesn’t say; traffic obstruction as City policy; things the City can fix vs. things they cannot; non-solutions to housing affordability; massive upzoning proposed; misrepresentation of the electorate; Advisory Committee appointments; non-negotiable mandates; growing problem of City departments choosing citizen advisory committees based on the outcomes that they want, irony of nonrepresentative appointments in a city with proportional representation elections, need for better outreach and recruitment; drought and fire hazards continue. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 636 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 19, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Nov 19, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Many opportunities for City boards and commissions; City Council diminution of authority of the Planning Board, growing City Council opposition to public input; process underway to ruin Broadway for the Cycling Safety Ordinance, removal of 75% of parking – all a done deal to rubber-stamp plans of City staff, possible political backlash, Traffic and Parking Department and other City departments don’t care; Linkage fee increases, Nexus studies, and proposal for Job Training Trust – how much is too much?; Dramatic upzoning proposal disguised as “ending exclusionary zoning” – potential for major political backlash, dumping all the negative effects onto the “corridors” for political expedience; status of possible City Charter changes – things that could use revision and things that should remain. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

November 17, 2024

Post-Apocalyptic Gathering – November 18, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Post-Apocalyptic Gathering – November 18, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

photo by Daniel MennerichWe’ll have to wait to see what the fallout will be of a changing federal picture on left-leaning “sanctuary cities” like Cambridge. I can easily imagine changes in both funding and eligibility for public housing and perhaps some economic repercussions for life sciences and pharmaceutical companies that dominate Kendall Square. Will there be efforts to replace lost federal money by jacking up local property taxes? It’s all just a big guessing game right now. I don’t believe we will be receiving too many federal favors for the next several years.

Here are the items that drew my local attention this week:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the findings of the 2024 Cambridge Resident Satisfaction Survey. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Yi-An Huang, Lee Gianetti, survey rep., Zusy, Azeem, Toner, Wilson, McGovern; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City Manager’s LGBTQ+ Friendly Housing Task Force Final Report. [text of report]
pulled by Simmons; comments by Simmons, Maura Pensak, Carolina Almonte, Phoebe West, McGovern, Zusy; Placed on File, Referred to Civic Unity Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments of members to the Cambridge Street Safety Improvement Project Working Group.
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Brooke McKenna (TPT), Toner (asks if there will be a similar group for Broadway – yes), Wilson; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #10. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Erik Sarno and Andrea Taylor and the reappointment of Saffana Anwar, Christopher Fort, Robert Winters, Tahir Kapoor, and Esther Hanig to the Central Square Advisory Committee for a term of three years.
pulled by Zusy; comments by Simmons, Yi-An Huang (on update to add RW), Zusy (notes only 9 applicants for 7 positions on CSAC; for HSAC only 12 applicants for 11 positions – suggests advertising more broadly), Iram Farooq (notes how prescriptive categories are for CSAC and HSAC, mechanism for applying for all open boards and commissions); Zusy asks if a broad range of perspectives is sought; Appointments Approved as Amended, Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #11. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments of Gareth Dohety, Ivy Moylan, Henry Grabar, Chad Bonney, and Ryan Clinesmith Montalvo and the reappointments of Matthew Simitis, Kari Kuelzer, John DiGiovanni, Nicola Williams, Alexandra Offiong, and Allison Crosbie to the Harvard Square Advisory Committee for a term of three years.
Appointments Approved, Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #12. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-36, regarding coordinated and timely communication related to interjurisdictional transportation projects. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan (bus shelters, green roofs, shade, Alewife maintenance tunnel, Asbestos Ordinance; Iram Farooq, Owen O’Riordan, City Solicitor Megan Bayer (noting that state/MBTA not subject to City’s ordinance), Nolan (Draw One Bridge), Farooq (state not currently planning to add bike/ped connection to bridge); Nolan (bridge over Fitchburg commuter rail and addition of station in Alewife area), Farooq (reconstruction of Alewife garage may have possibility of commuter rail station); Zusy (I-90 project coordination, impact of construction on traffic, Eversource projects, asbestos concerns at Alewife, Draw One Bridge, need for commuter rail station at Alewife and bridge); Sobrinho-Wheeler (start date for Memorial Drive reconstruction, Riverbend Park impacts), Owen O’Riordan; Zusy on plans for Transportation Committee; Referred to Transportation Committee 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to prepare a draft home rule petition to authorize the City of Cambridge to implement automated parking enforcement technology; and to continue to work with the City of Boston to collaborate on the home rule process.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan on special status of Boston and Cambridge that necessitates a home rule petition, notes that this would be cost-neutral; Siddiqui added as sponsor 9-0; Wilson asks why Boston, Cambridge are exceptions; Megan Bayer explains; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #2. Resolution in Support of H.823 and S.551, Paint Stewardship and Recycling.   Councillor Wilson, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted 9-0

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to prepare a Home Rule Petition to enact legislation which would allow the City of Cambridge to prohibit associations from unreasonably restricting the use of a solar energy system. [Charter Right – Nolan, Nov 4, 2024]
Nolan notes why home rule petition may be needed; Megan Bayer explains why state law on this matter is insufficient; Toner asks about enforcement; Bayer suggests that this could be done as either a zoning amendment or a municipal ordinance; McGovern suggests sending this to a committee for larger discussion; Zusy seeks clarification of intention, Nolan explains, Zusy notes how things could get “messy” with condo associations; Referred to Health & Environment Committee 9-0

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department to draft a home rule petition for the creation of a Cambridge Jobs Training Trust, and report back to the City Council in a timely manner. [Charter Right – Toner, Nov 4, 2024]
Sobrinho-Wheeler explains at authorization doesn’t obligate Council to implement, no need to send to Ordinance Committee; Amendment to strike “to be sent to the Ordinance Committee for a hearing” Adopted 9-0; Toner proposes sending to Economic Development Committee for further discussion (on 11 questions) and how this relates to how things are done now; comments by Yi-An Huang expresses concerns about raising linkage fees now, Ellen Semonoff, Toner asks whether setting up a Jobs Trust bank account would create obligation to fund it; Yi-An Huang notes last increase in Linkage Fee was from $22 to $33 based on 2019 Nexus Study, next Nexus Study to start in 2025, notes that Council will have to decide how Linkage Fee is to be allocated; Toner proposes referring to Economic Development Committee; Zusy notes inadequate options for CRLS students; McGovern has questions on how this would be implemented – wants to preserve all affordable housing allocation and increase Linkage Fee to add allocation for jobs training, but suggested that if the fee went up to something like $45 he would not support that; Sobrinho-Wheeler proposes amendment to have an Econ. Dev. meeting in addition to filing home rule petition promptly; McGovern notes RSTA initiatives; Siddiqui OK with further conversation in committee; Wilson, Zusy, Nolan, McGovern comments; Adopted Order as Amended 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

Committee Report #1. The Housing Committee held a public hearing on Apr 30, 2024 to discuss the feasibility of municipally funded housing vouchers as referenced in PO24#24. The meeting was recessed and reconvened on Oct 15, 2024 to continue the discussion. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

Committee Report #2. The Human Services and Veterans Committee held a public hearing on Oct 23, 2024 to discuss issues facing homeless shelters in Cambridge and concerns raised by the unhoused community. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

Committee Report #3. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Oct 23, 2024 to hear specific ideas from neighborhood leaders about revisions to the Multifamily Housing Proposal. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

Committee Report #4. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Oct 24, 2024 to discuss research on four-day work week pilot programs with businesses, government agencies, and non-profits and models for a four-day work week that have been implemented locally. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

Committee Report #5. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on Oct 31, 2024 to discuss the Economics of Real Estate: Housing, Zoning, and the Economic Impact of Zoning. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 8-0-1 (Simmons-Absent)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress