Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

May 3, 2023

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 587-588: May 2, 2023

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:28 am

Episode 587 – Cambridge InsideOut: May 2, 2023 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on May 2, 2023 at 6:00pm. Topics: John Clifford and Central Square heroes; AHO – different rules for different people; when bigger and denser is your only goal; starting with conclusions; Vision Zero fantasies; public policy driven by social media; the consequences of living in a news desert. Hosts: Robert Winters, Patrick Barrett [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 588 – Cambridge InsideOut: May 2, 2023 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on May 2, 2023 at 6:30pm. Topics: FY2024 Budget and shifting allocations; explosive growth of City Manager’s Office; self-congratulation disguised as public information; questioning the Cambridge Public Schools; Tax Classification – shifting the burden from commercial to residential, commercial abatements anticipated with high vacancy rates; cumulative effect of regulations and added costs; golden geese growing rarer; continuing kerfuffle over Riverbend Park and traffic diversion. Hosts: Robert Winters, Patrick Barrett [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

April 24, 2023

Preview of April 24, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,City Council,cycling,Fresh Pond,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:18 pm

Preview of April 24, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here’s my survey of the more interesting items on this week’s agenda:City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of School Committee Member Caroline Hunter as a member of the Family Policy Council.
Appointment Approved 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following persons as member of the to the Cambridge Commission on the Status of Women for a term of three years: • Jean Connor (appointment) • Caitlin Dube (appointment) • Rhonda Greene (reappointment) • Mara Horwitz (appointment) • Natalie Le (appointment) • Judith Tumusiime (appointment)
Appointments Approved 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following persons as members of the the Mass Ave Partial Construction Working Group: • Sukia Akiba • Steven Beaucher • Darren Buck • Christopher Cassa • Makayla Comas-Race • Gary Dmytryk • Debby Galef • Diane Gray • Denise Jillson • Timothy Keefe • Ruth Ryals • Eitan Normand • Daniel Stubbs • Laurie Pessah
Appointments Approved 9-0

“The Working Group will meet over a period of 12 months to advise City staff on key issues related to the planning, design, and construction of this important project.”

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, requesting that the City Council authorize an agreement to partner with the Town of Arlington (“Arlington”) in its receipt of a federal planning grant (“Grant”) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”).
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins, Zondervan, Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan (Roundtable suggested); Nolan offers a committee hearing and Siddiqui agrees; Order Adopted 9-0 (after Siddiqui misstep of merely calling for a vote to accept report and place on file)

“The Grant is to conduct a study in furtherance of this work undertaken by Arlington and the City as members of the Resilient Mystic Collaborative (“RMC”). … The Grant concerns the Amelia Earhart and the Charles River (the Island End River and the Draw 7 Park) dams that protect Arlington, the City, and other communities from coastal flooding. … Arlington’s Hazard Mitigation Plan recognizes coastal hazards as high and serious for Massachusetts but not currently applicable because of dams that turned the upper Mystic and Charles Rivers from tidal estuaries to freshwater impoundments. However, climate projections show the dams at risk of being overtopped by 2030 and failing by 2050.”

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to improvements to the area around Jerry’s Pond. (CM23#103) [Danehy Bridge Connectivity] [Open Space Needs Assessment] [Jerry’s Pond Communication from CM]
pulled by Siddiqui who expresses shock and disappointment on City’s lack of transparency in diversion of funds; Carlone says $400,000 is peanuts and that we should do both projects (bridge and Jerry’s Pond enhancements); McGovern notes ~700 new trees and ~$14 million from IQHQ but disappointment w/diversion of funds from Jerry’s Pond study; Toner asks what reasoning was for diversion of funds; O’Riordan notes loss of significant trees and level of excessive excavation and inability of site to act as wetland due to hydrology, potential benefits questionable; Comm. Watkins reiterates concerns about loss of significant trees, suggests a floating wetland adjacent to Rindge Avenue without doing excavation; Toner would like this all summarized in a memo, notes additional time and cost associated with plans from Friends of Jerry’s Pond; O’Riordan notes that IQHQ owns the site and that they do not support to proposal from advocates; Zondervan expresses concern about other groups not getting their ARRPA funds and Council’s inability to determine allocations, wants improvements on Rindge Ave. edge; City Manager Huang expresses gratitude to the advocates, City still looking at plans, says City does not take lightly reallocation of funds, echoes comment of Deputy City Manager, notes 2200 dump-truck loads of required excavation, concern about $600,000 toward a proposal that would not happen; Nolan acknowledges work of advocates and that plans improved as a result, expresses delight with RR crossing but would prefer an underpass instead; O’Riordan says City will be exploring both a bridge and an underpass; Nolan has liability concerns; Watkins notes significant amount of urban fill that would have to be moved and disposed – not clean soil, liability would fall on IQHQ; Azeem appreciates learning now about infeasible plans; Referred (Zondervan) to NLTP Committee 9-0Danehy Bridge Connectivity

“we plan to reallocate the ARRPA funds identified to study the feasibility of renovating Jerry’s Pond to fund the 25% design of a new bike and pedestrian bridge over the Fitchburg Commuter Line to connect Rindge Avenue and Danehy Park. … The latest multi-use path projects, including the upcoming Danehy-New Street Path and the recent completion of the Watertown-Cambridge Greenway, make the bike/ped bridge connection over the Fitchburg Commuter Line even more valuable.”

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 23-08, regarding a report regarding exploring additional less-lethal alternatives that pose the smallest risk of injury when deployed for standard issue in the Cambridge Police Department. (CM23#104) [text of report]
pulled by Zondervan who wants report also referred to Public Safety Committee for further discussion; Toner notes that only “Axon Taser 10” and “FN-303 Less-Lethal Launcher” (a shoulder-fired weapons system that is accurate from up to 160 feet) are not currently part of CPD inventory, would prefer that this matter not be referred to committee; Police Superintendent Rob Lowe notes that only the taser is currently recommended for addition to inventory; Simmons notes our exemplary Police Department, wants to allow Commissioner Elow freedom to make recommendations informed by ongoing study; McGovern asks about concerns that if officers had tasers this might lead to less de-escalation; Lowe notes that significant training would accompany any use of tasers; McGovern notes willingness of CPD to self-evaluate and adapt; Mallon asks about why FN-303 and “Vector Shield” not currently recommended; Nolan asks when PERF report may be available; Elow says they have begun and report will not be available until after inquest is done; Siddiqui chimes in; Zondervan notes that tasers can also be lethal; Report Referred to Public Safety Committee 9-0

“Whenever practicable, Cambridge Police officers are to use verbal and non-verbal engagement techniques and de-escalation actions to stabilize a law enforcement situation so that more time, options, and resources are available to gain a person’s voluntary compliance and to reduce or eliminate the need to use force. However, when de-escalation tactics have been attempted and failed or are not feasible based on the totality of the circumstances, officers are authorized to use reasonable force to gain, maintain, or reestablish control to protect the lives and safety of others and/or themselves.” … “we are recommending that the department wait and evaluate PERF’s final report and recommendations before we consider pursuing or expanding less-lethal options.”

Charter Right #2. Riverbend Park on Memorial Drive. [Charter Right – Simmons, Apr 10, 2023]
Simmons notes comments by Riverside residents who feel disrespected by Council intentions to ask DCR reconsideration – “people closest to the pain should be closest to the power” – asks Councillors Nolan and Azeem to rescind or table this Order; Nolan fully supports Order and claims that only a small number of people object, suggests that people in Riverside support all-weekend closure, proposes amendment to seek legal justification for full weekend closure; Carlone says all sides are right, City has insufficient open space, DCR controls the land and road, compliments Suzanne Blier (and others) suggestion to close from Eliot Bridge to JFK Street on Saturdays; Zondervan notes that DCR has decided against Saturday closures so Riverside residents were heard, calls traffic on Memorial Drive environmental injustice, says eventually it will be closed all weekend; Azeem notes that Order expresses disappointment about DCR decision to not consider other options; McGovern is dismissive of Blier proposal if this is a matter of legal authority, notes that neighborhood is divided on issue, wants traffic mitigation regardless; Siddiqui on defense over neighborhood concerns, agrees with need for traffic mitigation; Carlone notes that Blier proposal would still need DCR approval, notes that City has insufficient capacity for studying traffic; Simmons notes that compromise proposal for Eliot Bridge to JFK St. was suggested by multiple people; Nolan protests Simmons suggestion that a cover letter include minority view – Simmons takes exception; Order Adopted 7-2 as Amended (DS,PT – No)

I look forward to yet another meeting where advocates on either side of an issue talk past each other. I also expect a lot of “studies have shown” rhetorical BS. In the end, this may simply come down to whether someone has “pull” with the incoming DCR Commissioner.

Communications #22. A communication was received from Joan Pickett, regarding Material for Monday City Council Meeting. [Analysis of Cycling Safety in Cambridge Under the Cycling Safety Ordinance Year-3]
Placed on File 9-0

At the very least, this partially fills the gap left by the City’s failure to actually evaluate the safety impacts of various road reconfigurations undertaken in recent years. I’ll leave it to others to sift through the statistics. Anecdotally, I will say that I feel a lot more nervous when driving now because of the many different road obstructions and greatly narrowed lane widths. Whether they provide increased bicycle safety (as opposed to “comfort”) is debatable. Former Traffic Czar Joe Barr would likely call it all “traffic calming”, but I feel a lot less calm when driving, and I worry a lot more now about cyclists racing up while I’m making a right turn due to decreased visibility. This was not a problem when I previously would simply pull as far to the right as possible when making a turn.

Resolution #2. Resolution on the death of Ruth Hill.   Councillor Simmons
pulled by Simmons with comments of great respect; Adopted 9-0

Ruth Edmonds Hill was a magnificent and brilliant person in her own right, but some may remember “Sister Ruth” as the wife of the late Hugh Morgan Hill (“Brother Blue”). [Obituary]

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to bring together a working group to conduct outreach through neighborhood groups including the Fresh Pond Residents Alliance, and any other nearby neighborhood groups and City departments, in order to discuss and review options for use of the BB&N Field.   Councillor Nolan, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted 9-0

“this property could be utilized by the City in a variety of important ways, including: a location for the City’s operations, affordable housing development, preschool use, open space, and other uses which would benefit the larger Cambridge community” – It’s worth reiterating my comments from the previous meeting on this topic: “Toner asks about public process in determining uses for City-owned property; Mallon says site would be perfect for an affordable housing development; Zondervan proposes that tall affordable housing towers be built on this site on Larch Road; Carlone prefers mixed use w/o towers and proposes stormwater storage under buildings with zero parking.”

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to direct relevant departments to work together to develop a policy that would lead to a ban on the use of gas-powered lawn equipment in Cambridge in line with other municipalities and development of possible ordinance language limiting the use of gas-powered lawn equipment by residents, businesses, and city operations.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone
pulled by Toner; Nolan comments; Toner notes that a Working Group was supposed to have been formed (but wasn’t), asks if a proposed ban is a foregone conclusion; Zondervan bemoans fact that a ban has not already been enacted; Nolan states that within a few years there will be no gas-powered cars and no gas-powered equipment; Adopted 9-0, Referred to Health & Environment Committee

Frankly, among all the competing priorities worth pursuing, this ranks pretty low on my list. Then again, I live on a busy street where a leaf blower would be just another instrument in the cacophonous orchestra.

Committee Report #1. The Health and Environment Committee met on Mar 1, 2022 to receive an update on the Net Zero Action Plan. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Health and Environment Committee met on Mar 8, 2022 to conduct a public hearing on proposed BEUDO amendments. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Health and Environment Committee met on Mar 23, 2022 to continue discussion on the Net Zero Action Plan. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #4. The Health and Environment Committee met on Mar 29, 2022 to receive a report from the Climate Resilience Zoning Task Force. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #5. The Health and Environment Committee met on Tues, Apr 11, 2023 to review plans for solar and renewable energy installations in the city, including report on solar expansion and works by the CEA (Cambridge Energy Alliance) and potential for solar on city owned water supply land, and any other items related to renewable energy. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Please note that four of these five reports are from more than a year ago.

Committee Report #6. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Apr 13, 2023 on the Citizen’s Zoning Petition received from Michael Monestime et al. regarding Outdoor Use Zoning in the Central Square Cultural District. [text of report]
pulled by Zondervan; Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

This zoning petition will likely breeze through to ordination, but lest anyone be concerned about as-of-right noisiness to neighbors, the Cambridge License Commission will continue to have authority to regulate any potential nuisances (as opposed to the Board of Zoning Appeal). – Robert Winters

January 31, 2023

Arlington to Harvard Square on a Bicycle

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 1:44 pm

The video embedded in this post is of my bicycle ride on Massachusetts Avenue from the Arlington town line to Harvard Square and Brattle Street, November 29, 2022. I recorded continuously, so the video runs for 15 minutes. I have added narration explaining my actions. I describe many different riding conditions and strategies, so think that your patience to watch it all the way through is warranted. Most of the time, I chose not to ride in the designated bikeway, in the interest of my safety or to avoid obstructions. I didn’t cause delay for anyone: quite the contrary, the traffic signals established travel times and at the end, I caught up with a truck that had passed me 12 minutes earlier.

This is a high-definition video. For the best viewing experience, expand it to fill the screen.

January 18, 2023

Concerns about Garden Street and environs

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:22 am

Concerns about Garden Street and environs – a letter from Beth Gamse and Judith Singer

From: Beth Gamse
Date: January 12, 2023
To: City Manager; City Councillors; City Clerk; Dept. of Traffic, Parking and Transportation
Subject: Concerns about Garden Street and environs

January 12, 2023

Dear City Manager,
CC: City Council Members, City Clerk, and Acting Director of the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department

We write to you to express concerns about the recent changes on Garden Street, which have caused numerous unintended consequences on nearby streets and on the overall system of interconnected streets in western Cambridge. We are residents of one of those nearby streets – Walker Street – and are homeowners, taxpayers, and avid pedestrians.

Over the past year, we have attended all of the informational sessions about changes to Massachusetts Avenue as well as each community meeting about changes to Garden Street, and many City Council meetings at which street safety was a topic. Because our primary mode of transportation is on foot, we are especially interested in pedestrian safety, and we support the City’s commitment to improved safety for its residents and visitors. We appreciate the efforts made by the City, including the City Manager as well as the Traffic, Parking and Transportation (TPT) Department to engage in outreach to the community and conduct research about then-planned, since-implemented changes. However, in our opinion – and those of many of our neighbors on affected streets – the communication efforts and data collection/analyses fall far short of intended goals. Below, we outline specific issues and questions (in bold and italicized) about which we would deeply appreciate a response.

Communication and Participation

TPT engaged in a number of efforts to inform residents about proposed changes, including use of postcards to selected residential/business addresses in the neighborhoods thought to be most likely to experience disruption and posted placards announcing upcoming public meetings. This well-intentioned outreach did not take into account the fact that many people who use Garden Street do not live in the immediate catchment area; rather, they use Garden Street to get somewhere else, and now they use Raymond, Walker, Concord, Bond, Robinson, Madison, Huron, and Walden, among other local streets. From what we understand (based on comments from Representative Decker and other Raymond Street residents at the first and second Listening Sessions in November), Raymond Street residents were not included in the initial outreach about changes to Garden Street even though it [Raymond] is arguably one of the most adversely affected streets. Other than the Listening Sessions and periodic updates on the TPT website, how does the City plan to communicate its decisions about any updates and/or changes in implementation of Garden Street Safety Improvement efforts to ensure that information is available/provided to residents across the city’s system of interconnected streets?

Our understanding of the Garden Street Project is that it is part of a “Quick-Build” approach to make progress toward the Networked Streets and the Cycling Safety Ordinance (CSO). Recently, low concrete curbs were placed on Garden Street between Walker Street and the intersection with Concord Avenue, further narrowing the space available to motorists. Can the City please describe how installing concrete barriers is part of the “Quick Build” solutions? Additionally, how will snowplows navigate when snow renders the barriers less visible?

Project costs are not transparent. As taxpayers, we believe residents should be informed about the City’s budget, and the City should be transparent about how it allocates resources. When residents asked about additional pedestrian crossings across Garden Street at the Listening Sessions, we were told that because curb cuts able to accommodate universal access (e.g., wheelchairs, strollers) would require additional infrastructure costs, no additional crosswalks were possible with incurring capital costs. However, even though the installed bicycle lanes are designed as “quick-build” projects that do not include structural changes, the new concrete barriers clearly represent additional infrastructure costs to install – and plow around. How has the City communicated about planned/expected CSO costs to its citizens? When the CSO was passed by the City Council in 2019, was there a projected budget? How much has been allocated/spent so far?

There is little information about intra-departmental communication with other City agencies, including the Fire, Police, Public Works, School, and local hospital/emergency service providers. Informal communication with a dozen police officers assigned to monitor traffic patterns in the weeks after the Garden Street implementation (on Shepard, Garden, Raymond, Bond) revealed they were blind-sided by the changes, and were dismayed about the increased vehicular speeds on Garden and Raymond in particular, despite the speed alert signs. Walker Street, without the electric speed alert signs, has also seen increased vehicular speeds and volume. We raise this issue because we have observed – on multiple occasions – emergency vehicles blocked from traveling eastward on Garden Street because there is nowhere for cars to pull over. On a related note, the state recently passed a new law governing the minimum distance (4 feet) between cars and those who are “vulnerable,” including pedestrians, cyclists, and those engaged in the provision of emergency services (see the Boston Globe, January 3, 2023): “Pedestrians, cyclists gain protections with new law meant to reduce traffic deaths.” While the separated bike lanes may provide close to the required 4 feet, there is insufficient room to provide that distance to emergency vehicles anywhere on Garden Street between Huron Avenue and Arsenal Street. Can the City please describe pre- and post-implementation communication with other departments to ensure that emergency vehicles have the clearance required to pass traffic on Garden Street?

Listening Sessions both in person and via Zoom have always begun not with listening but with presentations by City staff; attendees have only been allowed to voice comments after City staff presentations. While many attendees of these events have noted that they are city residents, many have reported that they live elsewhere, and traverse Cambridge streets to reach their respective destinations. Despite the fact that the sessions were seemingly designed for residents of the affected neighborhoods – the people whose taxes support our city – too many residents were not even able to speak in thee time allotted for feedback, as individuals from other communities voiced their opinions. Can City officials explain why non-residents have equal speaking priority at meetings for Cambridge residents?

It is not clear that feedback provided at the Listening Sessions registers with the City. TPT personnel have described minor and incremental changes while indicating that the overwhelming majority of comments have been in favor of the current arrangement on Garden Street. The two in-person November listening sessions we attended at the Graham and Parks School were overwhelmingly dominated by residents who are concerned about the unintended consequences and whose questions to TPT remain unanswered; the January 4 Zoom session included both those who applaud the Garden Street Safety Project and those who asked the City to reconsider the Garden Street Safety Project, whether in part or whole. Additionally, the recent TPT report indicated that there is strong support for the changes to Garden Street, yet did not acknowledge the substantial community concerns raised at the Listening Sessions. As a result, it is not clear that the City is indeed listening to residents’ concerns. Can the City Manager, TPT, and the City Council please indicate whether any aspects of the project will be reconsidered, and when?

Nomenclature and word choice matter. The name “Garden Street Safety Project” does not communicate the nature of the project clearly or effectively. This project is exclusively driven by the Cycling Safety Ordinance, and while there have been some mentions of pedestrian safety in TPT presentations, they are clearly secondary. It is MORE challenging now than before October 28, 2022, to be a pedestrian on Walker Street, Raymond Street, Shepard Street, and Garden Street, because cars AND bicycles travel too fast, do not heed traffic light signals, stop or yield signs. Ironically, the 2023 parking permits for the City include a sticker for car owners to place on side view mirrors about checking for bikes, but there is no such sticker about checking for pedestrians. Sadly, in the most recent year, approximately 10 times as many pedestrians died in car-related accidents than cyclists in our state (99 and 10, respectively). As long as this project continues, can the City consider renaming this project to indicate what it is – a protected bicycle lane project – rather than (mis)representing it as creating safety for all, which it is not?

The majority of bicyclists and scooterists are using the lanes as intended. Unfortunately, those who do not risk endangering themselves as well as pedestrians, other cyclists, and drivers when traveling outside the designated lanes whether in the street or on sidewalks, in the wrong direction, and when ignoring traffic signs. We have had to jump out of harm’s way too many times to count when using crosswalks or “Walk” signs on Mass Ave, Garden, Shepard, Raymond, Linnaean, and Follen Streets, because cyclists/scooterists neither stop nor yield. What are the City’s plans for communicating with bicyclists and scooterists about respecting pedestrian safety and heeding traffic signs?

Notably, only a handful of City Councillors have attended some of the in-person “listening sessions,” and our City Manager has not; it is not possible to discern who attends the Zoom sessions as a listener. The recent TPT report includes a statement to residents from City Manager Yi-An Huang, including the following:

The reality is that many people feel unheard, and there is a broader challenge about how we make decisions when people disagree….For the City’s part, I recognize that there is work to do to improve our communication, transparency, and responsiveness, and this is a priority for me.

Can the City Manager, in particular, describe his efforts to improve communication, transparency, and responsiveness about the Garden Street Safety Project?

  • The City’s commitment to the CSO and the Vision Zero initiatives are laudable, yet the City’s decisions to proceed have not all been transparent nor have been shared in a manner that invites public participation in decision-making. Cambridge residents have not voted directly on either of these initiatives, for example, but instead have voted for City Council candidates who share their broad philosophies and vision for the City. Can the City use a process like a ballot question or the Participatory Budgeting to ask residents about their priorities with respect to these two initiatives? In the most recent round of Participatory Budgeting, for example, we find it telling that none of the selected projects was focused on bicycle safety but instead on other priorities for residents.

Data collection/analysis

  • The recent TPT report indicates the TPT Department recognizes that the process could have been improved. It also indicates that the City will continue to collect data about implementation. Because so much of the city population adheres to an academic calendar, data collection from mid-December through the end of January is unlikely to be sufficient to provide a clear understanding of the impacts of the traffic changes. Can the City describe the planned data collection for the future? Will the City ensure that sufficient data are collected – on a range of days, times of day and times of year – to demonstrate to residents that their lived experiences of the effects of these changes are represented validly and reliably? We live on an affected street and are out-and-about several times a day most days of the year. There is great variation over time that does not appear to have been captured by the measurements to date.
  • The report presented information about average speeds on affected streets. However, information about averages alone is not sufficient – the distribution is also important to know because averages mask variation. The major speed issue isn’t about “average speed,” it’s about the faster speeds that many motorists – and frankly cyclists/scooterists, especially those with motorized devices – are achieving. As you consider expanding the amount of data collection over multiple days and times of day, please collect information on the entire distribution of speeds.
  • Selection of independent third-party urban planning/traffic management organization to collect/analyze data given talent in Cambridge. Governments are wise to contract with independent consultants to evaluate the effects of policy changes. Having the same people who implement the policy evaluate its effects does not provide the level of arms-length assessment needed given the felt impacts of these changes on residents. Will the city commit to a quality independent assessment of the impact of these changes?

Beth Gamse, bethgamse@gmail.com, 617-448-4860
Judith D. Singer, Judith_singer@harvard.edu, 617-999-4701
14 Walker St, Cambridge, MA 02138

December 5, 2022

First pass at the Dec 5, 2022 Cambridge City Council agenda

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:23 am

First pass at the Dec 5, 2022 Cambridge City Council agenda

The clock is running down on the first half of the game. Time to get a beer or decide to be a candidate or both. Here’s hoping that Maura Healey is in a Cambridge appointing mood this month and next so that we can open up some seats and bring in some prospects from the minors. Here’s what’s on this week’s dance card:Countdown

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report with a recommendation to adopt the Emissions the Accounting Zoning Petition (Version 3) with clarifying comments. [Planning Board report]
pulled by Zondervan; Referred to Petition 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board Zoning Petition to consider adoption of the attached Climate Resilience Zoning. [Planning Board Zoning Petition]
pulled by Nolan; Referred to Planning Board & Ordinance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City Manager’s 90 Day Report.
pulled by Mallon; Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Government Operations, Rules & Claims Committee held a public meeting on Nov 22, 2022 to discuss the City Manager’s Annual Evaluation process. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Vice Mayor Mallon, transmitting information regarding the City Manager Annual Review process. [City Manager Performance Review] [Proposed City Manager Annual Performance Review Process] [City Manager Draft Annual Performance Review Template]
Placed on File as Amended 9-0

I especially liked this note in the Manager’s Report: “Finally, many of our greatest challenges are fundamentally regional issues – housing, homelessness, climate change, and transportation. We often view our work within our 6.4 square miles, but there is a need for greater coordination with our neighbors and state government. As we enter 2023 and welcome a new Healey administration, I’m looking forward to Cambridge having a greater voice to advocate for and collaborate to find solutions that match the scale of our challenges.”

And this: “As with all relationships, I believe the relationship between the City and Council is not a static arrangement that can be written down or governed through contract provisions. Relationships are interactions between people over time and built on mutual respect, shared norms, communication, and trust. There will be mistakes and areas for improvement, and we won’t agree on every issue, but I’m committed to creating a government that works and where we are increasing alignment and trust between the City, Council, and community.”

Perhaps the greatest indication of the mettle of our new City Manager will be how he handles all the upcoming appointments to City Boards & Commissions. Will political considerations outweigh other factors? For at least this one observer, those appointments and how the city councillors handle or mishandle their newfound power to review (some of) these appointments will be very telling. The City Manager also speaks of “greater empowerment for leaders and staff,” but accountability and answering for poor decisions and the willingness to change direction when warranted are just as important. The same goes for all of our elected officials.

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to asking the Department of Conservation and Recreation to suspend the Saturday closures of Memorial Drive between Greenough Boulevard and Western Avenue for the remainder of this year. (CM22#241)
pulled by Zondervan; Zondervan motion to ask Manager to not ask DCR to suspend remaining Saturday closures fails 3-6 (AM,QZ,SS – YES; BA,DC,MM,PN,DS,PT – NO); Placed on File 9-0

Charter Right #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Reports Items Numbered 16-111, 18-38, and 20-61, regarding Municipal Property Inventory. [Charter Right – Zondervan, Nov 21, 2022]
Placed on File 8-0-1 (Toner ABSENT)

I wish this Property Inventory was so heavily intertwined with the future of the greater Central Square area, but this is the hand we’ve been dealt. I will be very disappointed if the provision of subsidized housing outweighs the whole range of other possibilities. I also hope that residents and councillors from the other side of the city don’t continue in their misguided and lazy belief that all social services should be further concentrated in Central Square – one of our most significant commercial and cultural districts in the city.

83 Communications – mostly from last week expressing shock and outrage about the proposal from three councillors to supersize the city no matter what anyone thinks.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to work with the residents at 931 Massachusetts Avenue to identify and provide a short-term parking spot in front of 931 Massachusetts Avenue.   Councillor Toner, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons
pulled by Toner; Toner amendment Adopted 6-3 (BA,AM,QZ – NO); Azeem amendment Adopted 6-3 (DC,DS,PT – NO); McGovern amendment Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (QZ – NO)

Further evidence that an amended and overly rigid Bicycle Safety Ordinance is no substitute for good traffic engineering that anticipates and takes into account the whole range of parking and transportation needs.

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate departments to conduct street cleaning without towing starting with the 2023 season.   Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Nolan; Charter Right – Simmons

I have mixed feelings about this – especially as a resident who has been voluntarily clearing the storm drains in my neighborhood for decades. I have always appreciated a good curb-to-curb cleaning during the warmer months and plowing snow as close to the curb as possible during winter. Having even one vehicle to go around negates much of this benefit. I would be happier if a new policy had some discretion, i.e., if the crews and police feel that little is gained by towing in a specific occasion then a pricey ticket may be sufficient. Unfortunately, there are many people now living in Cambridge who might just write that off as the “cost of doing business” as they wallow in their negligence. – Robert Winters

November 5, 2022

Roads Scholars? – Notable Items on the Nov 7, 2022 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,cycling — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:18 am

Roads Scholars? – Notable Items on the Nov 7, 2022 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Apparently the quickest roads to City Hall right now are via Brattle Street and Garden Street. Here are the agenda items that drove me to comment:Penny Farthing

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to approval requested for an appointment of new members to the Cambridge Commission for Persons with Disabilities (CCPD) – Keisha Greaves, Robert Goss [three-year terms].
Appointments Approved 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-58 , regarding directing the appropriate City staff to establish a fund designed to assist those City employees in same-sex marriages with paying for surrogacy services. [City Solicitor’s response]
pulled by Simmons; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report with a recommendation to adopt the Incentive Zoning Rate Study Petition, with clarifying changes.
pulled by Zondervan; Referred to Petition 9-0

Lotsa Communications about bike lanes and the collateral damage of cut-through traffic caused by the City’s latest “engineering” solutions.

Order #1. Policy Order Regarding Traffic Flow on Garden Street.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Carlone
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Simmons, Carlone, Nolan, McGovern, Zondervan (proposes amendments), Mallon, Siddiqui, Toner (willing to acept amendments), Carlone, Azeem, Nolan, Simmons; Charter Right – Simmons

Order #2. Ban Turns on Red Citywide.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone
pulled by Mallon (who apparently advertised this proposal with the print and broadcast press), amendment proposed; comments by Azeem, Carlone, Zondervan, Toner (notes that Traffic Director already has authority to impose “No Turn on Red”), McGovern (notes Alewife Brook Pkwy at Rindge Ave. backups), Nolan, Simmons, Siddiqui; Mallon amendment passes 9-0; Amend to add McGovern, Zondervan, Nolan, Carlone as cosponsors passes 9-0; Nolan amendment (as further amended by Zondervan) passes 9-0; Order Adopted 7-2 [Simmons, Toner – NO]

Order #4. MBTA Pass [for City employees].   Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon
pulled by Mallon; comments by Siddiqui, Mallon; Order Adopted 7-0-2 (Carlone, Toner – ABSENT)

Order #5. Roundtable on Broadband.   Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #6. Capital Projects Finance Meeting.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #7. Revised MBTA Bus Redesign.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Toner
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Simmons; Substitute Order Adopted 9-0 (this substitute was not made available to the public in any form)

Note: Rather than offer my usual comments this week, I instead spent my time Monday restoring my living room to a condition where I can now find and play all of my favorite CDs and vinyl records. Some things are just more important than Cambridge City Council meetings. – Robert Winters

October 15, 2022

No Retreat – Notable Items on the October 17, 2022 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,Charter,City Council,Harvard Square,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:03 am

No Retreat – Notable Items on the October 17, 2022 Cambridge City Council Agenda

The councillors had a private, unannounced retreat last week where they learned to get along. Yeah, right. This week they’re back to bide their time as some of them continue to “charter” a course to take over the government. Some of the more notable agenda items this week are:City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a public health update.
Placed on File 9-0

Incentive Zoning and Linkage

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of a Housing Contribution made under the Incentive Zoning provisions of the Zoning Ordinance in the amount of $1,565,953 from DIV 35 CPD, LLC to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order O-12 dated Oct 3, 2022, regarding review of recent proposed amendments to the Incentive Zoning Rate Petition.
pulled by Toner; Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #3. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on July 27, 2022 to continue discussions around an Ordinance potentially raising the linkage fee rates. (#2022-14). [Text of Committee Report]
Rules suspended (Toner) to take this with Mgr #13; Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #4. The Ordinance Committee held a public meeting on Sept 7, 2022 to continue the discussion around Ordinance # 2022-14, Section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 Special Regulations Linkage Fee, proposal to amend by substitution, raising linkage fee rates. [Text of Committee Report]
Rules suspended (Toner) to take this with Mgr #13; Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #6. Section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 Special Regulations linkage fee, be amended by substitution. (Ordinance #2022-14) [Passed to 2nd Reading Sept 12, 2022; To Be Ordained Oct 17 or Oct 24, 2022]
Rules suspended (Toner) to take this with Mgr #13;
Toner amendment [“so long as there is no change of use”] Adopted 5-4 (BA,DC,PN,DS,PT – YES; AM,MM,QZ,SS – NO);
Azeem Amendment [“has obtained a building permit for reconstruction within three years”]
Adopted 6-3 (BA,DC,MM,PN,DS,PT – YES; AM,QZ,SS – NO);
Zondervan amendment [“for incentive projects less that 60,000 sq ft in total gross-floor-area”] Adopted 9-0;
Zondervan proposed amendment to strike final sentence Fails 4-5 (AM,MM,QZ,SS – YES; BA,DC,PN,DS,PT – NO);
Main Amendment Ordained as Amended 9-0; Reconsideration (Nolan) Fails 1-8 (QZ – YES)

Comm. #61. A communication was received from Patrick W. Barrett III, regarding linkage labs and Central Square.
Placed on File 9-0

Taking a Step Back to Look at Net Effect

Order #3. Policy Order Seeking Development Analysis.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Nolan, Charter Right – McGovern

Political Religion, One-Size-Fits-All, and the Continuing War on Cars

Manager’s Agenda #12. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, regarding the Accessory Parking Requirements Zoning Petition.
pulled by Toner; proposed amended language adopted 7-1-0-1 (Carlone – PRESENT, Toner – NO); Referred to Petition 8-1 (Carlone – NO)

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking, and Transportation Department to meet with and receive input from the Vision Zero, Pedestrian, Bicycle Committee, the Council on Aging, the Transit Advisory Committee, the Commission for Persons with Disabilities Advisory Board, Cambridge Police Department, and any other departments, to review and revise the Cambridge Street Code, promulgate the updated guide throughout the city, and develop recommendations for staffing and methods of improving traffic enforcement. [Charter Right – Zondervan, Oct 3, 2022]
Mayor Siddiqui refers to this as having been “charterwritten” this; Order Adopted 6-2-0-1 (PN,QZ – NO, DC – PRESENT);
Zondervan amendments:
#1 – Fails 1-8 (QZ – YES); #2 – Approved 8-1 (DS – NO); #3 – Approved 8-1 (DS – NO);
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Resolution #4. That the City Council go on record thanking Joe Barr for his service.   Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui
pulled by Azeem

Combating Bank Inflation

Applications & Petitions #1. A Zoning Petition has been received from Suzanne P. Blier, et. al Harvard Square Zoning Petition Modification regarding Frontage of Financial Institutions. [text of petition]
pulled by Zondervan; Referred to Ordinance Committee and Planning Board 8-0-1 (Carlone ABSENT)

81 Communications – Trees (60), Parking Minimums – Pro and Con, mainly depending on your political religion (8), Bike Lanes (2), Linkage and Incentive Zoning (4), and several more. Of particular note are:
Comm. #60. A communication was received from Patrick W. Barrett III, regarding public safety.
Comm. #61. A communication was received from Patrick W. Barrett III, regarding linkage labs and Central Square.
Comm. #81. A communication was received from Joan Pickett, regarding the status of the citizens’ petition signed by 97 registered voters living on or near Brattle Street.

Joan Pickett’s communication is especially interesting in that it refers to a petition to the Traffic Board which has existed under a Special Act of the Legislature for nearly 50 years but which was allowed to “disappear” by the Department of Traffic, Parking, & Transportation – thereby eliminating any appeals process for changes in traffic and parking regulations. Technically the Board still exists and its 3 members (all of whom are still Cambridge residents) would still be on the Traffic Board as “holdover” appointees until others were appointed. Those appointments were never made.

One Ring to Rule Them All

Order #1. That the City Manager direct the City Solicitor and City Clerk to update the posted City Council rules on the website and other locations where posted, to properly reflect the change made to Rule 24c that adds the sentence “individuals will be heard in the order that they signed up whether they are participating in person or remotely.” and to report back to the Government Operations, Rules and Claims committee when complete.   Vice Mayor Mallon
pulled by Mallon, also 3 Orders with Gov’t Operations Committee Report; Order Adopted 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Government Operations, Rules & Claims Committee met on Apr 28, 2022, to discuss potential changes to the City Council Rules. The attached “RULES OF THE CITY COUNCIL, 2022-2023” shows the changes in red, that the Committee is putting forth to the City Council with a favorable recommendation to adopt. [text of committee report]
Placed on File 9-0; 3 Orders Adopted

And the rest…

Order #2. That the City Manager direct the City Solicitor to develop language to regulate car-sharing services that register vehicles to Cambridge residences.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Simmons
pulled by Mallon, reference to Awaiting Report #21-60; Referred to Ordinance Committee 9-0

Order #4. Supporting HD 5394.  Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner, Mayor Siddiqui
pulled by Nolan (opposed to tax refunds), amended by Carlone to add all as sponsors (which is an incredibly coercive practice), Adopted as Amended 9-0

October 3, 2022

Growing a Government – for Better or Worse: October 3, 2022 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 2:58 pm

Growing a Government – for Better or Worse: October 3, 2022 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here are a few items that warrant further comment this week:Fat City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on new positions. [responds to Awaiting Report Items 22-37 and 22-40]
pulled by Carlone; Placed on File 9-0

Here come the “Chief People Officer”, the “Talent Officer”, the Director of Community Engagement, and the Director of Emergency Management. I’m not quite sure what to make of the first three of these new positions.

The Linkage Question

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 22-62, regarding requests for a legal opinion and additional analysis on linkage fee rate increase discussion.
pulled by Carlone along with Mgr #6, Mgr #7, Unf. Business #4, Comm. & Reports #1; McGovern amendment adopted 9-0; Referred to Petition

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board report with a recommendation not to adopt the Incentive Zoning Rate Increase Petition.
pulled by McGovern; Referred to Petition 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a communication received from the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust regarding the Incentive Zoning amendment.
pulled by McGovern; Referred to Petition 9-0

Unfinished Business #4. Section 11.202(b) of Article 11.000 Special Regulations linkage fee., be amended by substitution. (Ordinance #2022-14). [Passed to 2nd Reading Sept 12, 2022; To Be Ordained on or after Oct 3, 2022]
Removed for discussion and amendment, returned to Unfinished Business

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Councillor Marc McGovern, transmitting a proposed amendment to the linkage fee.
McGovern amendment adopted 9-0; Referred to Petition

Late Order #12. That the City Manager direct the Community Development and the Law Department to review the amendment that states that exclusing the first 30,000 sq ft for buildings less that 60,000 sq ftin total size and sharing feedback, and report back to the City Council by the regular City Council meeting on Mon, Oct 17.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondevan, Councillor Azeem
Order Adopted 8-0-0-1 (Carlone – PRESENT)

We’ll see how this goes, but it will be very disappointing if this all comes down to just maximizing revenue generation without regard to any other incentives or unintended consequences.

Taxation without Representation

Manager’s Agenda #1 (Tax Rate Hearing). A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to votes necessary to seek approval from the Massachusetts Department of Revenue of the tax rate for FY2023. [Tax Rate Orders] [Tax Rate Letter]

The bottom line is that: the FY23 Adopted Operating Budget increased by 6.5% over the FY22 Adjusted Budget. The June 2022 FY23 Adopted Budget projected a property tax levy increase of $41.5 million, or 8.4%, to $536.3 million in order to fund operating and capital expenditures. This included the use of $13 million from Free Cash. With approval of the recommendations, the actual FY23 tax levy required to support the FY23 Budget is $531,600,922 – an increase of $36.9 million or 7.45% from FY22. This increase is lower than the estimated increase of 8.4% projected in the June 2022 Adopted Budget due in large part from higher than projected state aid and the use of reserve funds to lower the required tax levy. The property tax levy increase of 7.45% is above the FY22 increase of 4.7%. The property tax levy increase is also above the five-year (FY19-FY23) annual average increase of 6.44%, and the ten-year (FY14-FY23) annual average increase of 5.31%. Based on a revised property tax levy of $531,600,922 the FY23 residential tax rate will be $5.86 per thousand dollars of value, subject to Department of Revenue approval. This is a decrease of $0.06, or 1% from FY22. The commercial tax rate will be $10.38, which is a decrease of $0.85, or 7.6% from FY22. By property class, on average a single-family home will see a 6.6% tax increase, a condo will see a 6.5% decrease, a two-family will see a 4.7% increase, and a three-family will see a 5.4% increase.

Required Votes:
• Authorize $19,000,000 in Free Cash to Reduce the FY23 Tax Levy. [Adopted 8-1, QZ – NO]
• Transfer of Excess Overlay Balances. [Adopted 8-1, QZ – NO]
• Classify Property and Establish Minimum Residential Factor. [Adopted 9-0]
• Residential Exemptions. [Adopted 9-0]

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department to convene a North Massachusetts Avenue Corridor District Zoning Proposal Working Group Policy Order Proposing a North Massachusetts Avenue (NMA) Corridor Working Group for the purpose of developing comprehensive zoning recommendations. [Charter Right – Azeem, Sept 19, 2022]
Withdrawn by Councillor Toner in favor of new Policy Order #3 (yet the required vote for unanimous consent was NOT taken)

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department to convene a North Massachusetts Avenue Corridor District Zoning Proposal Working Group by June 15, 2023.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; Order Adopted 9-0

To repeat what I said from the previous meeting: “This is a very promising Order. I will note, however, that unlike the days of yore when CDD would study and process things to death before coming to any conclusions, they often now arrive with conclusions and simply run interference during any subsequent public process. Let’s hope this time is different.”

Wild in the Streets

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Transportation and Parking Department to convene a series of meetings with the Vision Zero, Pedestrian Committee, Bicycle Committee, the newly appointed Bicycling Advisory Committee, Cambridge Police Department, and any other departments deemed necessary, to review and revise the Cambridge Street Code. [Charter Right – Simmons, Sept 19, 2022]
Withdrawn by Councillor Toner in favor of new Policy Order (yet the required vote for unanimous consent was NOT taken)

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Traffic, Parking, and Transportation Department to meet with and receive input from the Vision Zero, Pedestrian, Bicycle Committee, the Council on Aging, the Transit Advisory Committee, the Commission for Persons with Disabilities Advisory Board, Cambridge Police Department, and any other departments, to review and revise the Cambridge Street Code, promulgate the updated guide throughout the city, and develop recommendations for staffing and methods of improving traffic enforcement.   Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Simmons, Councillor McGovern
pulled by Toner; Charter Right – Zondervan

It is noteworthy that at the previous meeting a number of prominent members of the bicycle lobby took issue with the idea of updating the Cambridge Street Code, and at least two councillors carried their water. Go figure.

On the Table #3. That the City Council refer the zoning petition regarding lab use to the Ordinance Committee and Planning Board for a hearing and report. [Tabled Sept 19, 2022]
Removed from Table by Toner 8-1 (QZ – NO); Amended by Toner, Mallon; Amendment Adopted 8-1 (BA – NO); Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (QZ – NO); Referred to Economic Development and University Relations Committee and the Neighborhood & Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee for a review and discussion

Unfinished Business #5. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of appropriation and authorization to borrow $4,500,000 to provide funds for the design and construction of building renovations to the vacant City owned property at 105 Windsor Street. [Passed to 2nd Reading Sept 12, 2022; To Be Ordained on or after Oct 3, 2022]
pulled by Zondervan; Order Adopted 9-0

Unfinished Business #7. That the City Council schedule a hearing of the Ordinance Committee for the purposes of amending the Ordinance #2022-3 Wage Theft of the City of Cambridge to insert the language. [Passed to 2nd Reading Sept 19, 2022; To Be Ordained on or after Oct 3, 2022]
pulled by Zondervan; Ordained 9-0

Resolution #18. Happy 80th Birthday wishes to Bill Cunningham.   Councillor Zondervan

Happy birthday, Bill – even though we’ll probably never agree on a lot of things.

BEUDO Communications

Communications #31. A communication was received from Patrick W. Barrett III, regarding BEUDO Meeting Recap.

Communications #40. A communication was received from Nancy E. Donohue, Director of Government and Community Relations, Cambridge Chamber of Commerce regarding joint Business/Institutional BEUDO letter. [Joint Business/Institutional BEUDO letter] [BEUDO April 2022 letter] [BEUDO questions from 9-15-22] [BEUDO Amendment Requirements]

The “conversation” continues in spite of the tin ears of some councillors.

Time of the Season

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to convene an advisory group to determine ways in which the City can work to lift up the voices and experiences of the descendants of the Indigenous People who currently reside in our community.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Azeem, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan
pulled by Simmons; Adopted 8-1 as Amended (Carlone – ABSENT)

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to affix the Indigenous Peoples’ Day Banner above JFK Street and Mount Auburn Street beginning on Oct 4, 2022, for no less than one week and recognize Indigenous Peoples’ Day on Oct 10, 2022.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Azeem, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by McGovern; Adopted as Amended 9-0

At the same time, let’s give a hearty shout-out to all of the immigrants from other continents and their descendants who have contributed so much to this country and the world.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department to automatically provide an initial legal opinion to the City Council and the City Clerk at least three business days in advance of the first Public Hearing on any amendment to the Code of Ordinances formally introduced in the City Council.   Councillor Zondervan, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #8. Amendment to section 22.25.1(c) of Article 22, entitled Sustainable Design and Development.   Councillor Zondervan
pulled by Zondervan; Referred to Planning Board & Ordinance Committee 9-0

Committee Report #5. On Sept 21, 2022, at 5:30pm, the Ordinance Committee, Chaired by Councillor McGovern, continued the Public Hearing on Ordinance #2022-5 that would eliminate parking minimums. This ordinance was originally proposed under POR 2022 #19. Councillor Zondervan made a motion that was approved by the Committee to amend the petition by substitution so that it adds the sentence underlined and in red below to section 6.30, and that this be the entirety of the petition. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0; Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended (by Toner) 8-1 (Carlone – NO)

I do want to point out that one can support eliminating parking minimums in many circumstances while still acknowledging their value in other circumstances. Treating this as yet another ideological mandate is not helpful, but I suppose that’s where we’re at these days. – Robert Winters

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress