Episode 18 of Cambridge InsideOut – Boulder vs. Cincinnati vs. Fractional transfer methods in Cambridge’s PR elections:
If you would like to look at the demonstrations used in these videos, you’ll find them at http://rwinters.com/experiment/.
November 13, 2013
Boulder vs. Cincinnati vs. Fractional transfer methods in Cambridge’s PR elections
Comments Off on Boulder vs. Cincinnati vs. Fractional transfer methods in Cambridge’s PR elections
November 6, 2013
Unofficial 2013 Cambridge Election Results
Unofficial 2013 Cambridge Election Results (Nov 6, 2013)
| 16th Count | |
| Cheung, Leland | 1774 |
| Maher, David | 1774 |
| Simmons, Denise | 1774 |
| Toomey, Tim | 1774 |
| Benzan, Dennis | 1774 |
| McGovern, Marc | 1682 |
| Kelley, Craig | 1560 |
| Carlone, Dennis | 1553 |
| Mazen, Nadeem | 1546 |
| vanBeuzekom, Minka | 1540 |
Nov 6, 8:30pm – The plot thickens in the City Council election. At the end of Tuesday’s ballot count, there were only 51 votes separating the 7th through 10th candidates with only 15 votes separating the 9th place candidate (Nadeem Mazen) and the 10th place candidate (Minka vanBeuzekom) in the decisive 16th Count. When Wednesday’s auxiliary ballots were included, the gap between the 7th through 10th candidates (Kelley, Carlone, Mazen, vanBeuzekom) narrowed to just 20 votes and only 6 votes now separate the 9th place candidate (Nadeem Mazen) and the 10th place candidate (Minka vanBeuzekom) in the decisive 16th Count.
At this point the winners have not changed, but the margin of victory is now shockingly small. There will be one last official count on Friday, November 15 that will include any overseas absentee ballots and provisional ballots. In some recent elections, due to the method of surplus distribution, the addition of just a few extra ballots has caused swings of 20 or more votes in the tabulation.
City Council (in order of election): Leland Cheung, David Maher, Denise Simmons, Tim Toomey, Dennis Benzan, Marc McGovern, Craig Kelley, Dennis Carlone, Nadeem Mazen. [Detailed Report]
Incumbents defeated: Ken Reeves, Minka vanBeuzekom
School Committee (in order of election): Patty Nolan, Fred Fantini, Richard Harding, Kathleen Kelly, Fran Cronin, and Mervan Osborne. [Detailed Report]
Incumbents defeated: None
Unofficial Election Results – City Council and School Committee (PDF) [link corrected]
Preliminary 2013 Cambridge Election Results
Preliminary 2013 Cambridge Election Results (Nov 5)
Nov 6, post midnight – It was an interesting night at The Count. Susana Segat and I did the live broadcast from the Senior Center and had many guests on the show including many of the City Council and School Committee candidates. In years past I would have been the first person to deliver the results, but tonight we were busy from the beginning of the show at 9:00pm all the way until 11:30pm or later. In case you have not yet heard the preliminary results, here they are:
City Council (in order of election – modified Wednesday to reflect actual order of election in final round): Leland Cheung, David Maher, Dennis Benzan, Tim Toomey, Denise Simmons, Marc McGovern, Craig Kelley, Dennis Carlone, Nadeem Mazen. [Detailed Report]
Incumbents defeated: Ken Reeves, Minka vanBeuzekom
School Committee (in order of election): Patty Nolan, Fred Fantini, Richard Harding, Kathleen Kelly, Fran Cronin, and Mervan Osborne. [Detailed Report]
Incumbents defeated: None
The City Council election quota was 1713 with 17,128 valid ballots counted. Only Leland Cheung exceeded quota with a surplus of 604 ballots.
The School Committee election quota was 2292 with 16,040 valid ballots counted. Three candidates reached quota on the 1st Count: Patty Nolan with a huge surplus of 1502 ballots, Fred Fantini with a surplus of 493 ballots, and Richard Harding with 3 surplus ballots.
It’s important to emphasize that these are the preliminary figures. There are an additional 710 additional City Council ballots that will be inspected and included on Wednesday. Many of these may be blank ballots, but most will likely contain valid choices. In the City Council race, in the deciding round the vote totals for the 7th through 10th place candidates were: Kelley 1517, Carlone 1510, Mazen 1481, and vanBeuzekom 1466. That’s only a 15 vote margin between 9th and 10th place, so it’s possible that the unofficial results on Wednesday could change.
In the School Committee race, there are an additional 1,673 ballots to be inspected and counted on Wednesday. Most of these will likely be blank ballots without valid choices. However, even if there is a substantial number of valid ballots yet to be counted, the margins between candidates are such that it’s essentially impossible for the results to change.
I’ll be at the Senior Center on Wednesday and will post the final, unofficial results when they are known. – RW
November 3, 2013
Counting Down to the Count – Nov 4, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights
Counting Down to the Count – Nov 4, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights
It’s the Eve of The Count – the night before the 2013 Municipal Election, and there’s no getting around the fact that there will be some nervous energy flowing through the Sullivan Chamber. Some activists would have preferred to have a controversial issue or two voted at the 11th hour which might sway some voters, but this is not the case. There are, however, a few noteworthy items on what has traditionally been a short agenda on the eve of an election.
Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Mr. Owen O’Riordan as Public Works Commissioner effective Nov 1, 2013.
Manager’s Agenda #3. Transmitting communication from Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Mr. Stephen J. Lenkauskas as City Electrician for the City of Cambridge effective Nov 1, 2013.
Manager’s Agenda #4. Transmitting communication from Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Ms. Andrea Spears Jackson as the full time License Commission Chair for the City of Cambridge, effective Dec 9, 2013.
The Rossi Administration continues to take shape with a trio of excellent appointments.
Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting communication from Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, relative to a proposed Home Rule Petition which would provide an exception to the residency preference requirement for Cambridge police officer and fire fighter appointments for those high school graduates who were Cambridge residents at the time of graduation from high school.
Though I’m not entirely familiar with the background of this, it seems to be a simple case of fairness.
Resolution #28. Congratulations to the Boston Red Sox on the occasion of becoming Major League Baseball’s World Series Champions. Councillor Toomey
We approve of this Resolution unanimously (and the crowd roared its approval).
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to consult with City personnel regarding the enforcement of rules and regulations governing bicycle riding, mandatory white lights on bicycles, and data collection of injuries resulting from cyclist-pedestrian conflicts. Vice Mayor Simmons
Let’s make a list of some of the laws we would like to see actually enforced in Cambridge. I completely agree that cyclists must obey the same laws as motorists or pay the consequences, but I would also aggressively fine people who park their cars more than a foot from the curb (very unkind to cyclists) and motorists who "block the box" causing traffic congestion. It’s not exactly martial law when police and parking control officers simply enforce existing, sensible laws.
Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council on the report of the net direct debt per capita which lists Cambridge as one of ten cities with the highest amount of net direct debt per capita; specifically how this report should be interpreted and what this means for Cambridge, now and in the future. Councillor Cheung
I read something about this the other day. I don’t think it’s an issue of great concern, but am looking forward to the response.
Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to appoint a special committee, to be comprised of both City Councillors and of Cambridge residents, to take up the work of holding monthly conversations about the lessons learned from the Malvina Monteiro lawsuit, and about how the City can improve upon its internal handling of race and class matters as an employer, beginning as of the start of the next calendar year. Vice Mayor Simmons
The Vice Mayor has been hosting meetings on this topic for some time, and dissenting opinions (like mine) were greeted with flagrant hostility by some of the attendees. In accordance with the City’s Plan E Charter, this is a matter properly handled within the Personnel Department with the guidance of appropriate City Council Orders directed through the City Manager. If the next City Council chooses to again take up this matter in one of its standing committees, they are free to do so.
Communications & Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received from Mayor Henrietta Davis transmitting to the City Council an Open Meeting Law Complaint from Charles Teague together with a proposed City Council response to the Attorney General, prepared by the City Clerk in consultation with the City Solicitor, for the City Council’s review and approval. [HTML version of draft response]
The bottom line is simply this: Mr. Teague wants the City Council to be compelled to take the following actions in response to his allegations: 1) admit intentional violation of Open Meeting Law on April 8, 2013 which led to the failure of the "Net Zero Emissions Amendment" (NZEA) to MIT’s zoning petition; 2) order correction of Zoning Ordinance by including the NZEA as Davis’ first vote was legal, her change of her vote was not legal, and therefore cannot be honored. MIT can simply file another zoning petition to remove the NZEA; and 3) not appoint Councillors Maher & Reeves as chairs of any committees for the next two-year term.
A few observations: Anyone who was at that public meeting witnessed the very public response of the MIT representatives when this 11th hour amendment was introduced. There was nothing secret about it. They simply alerted the City Council that their "memorandum of understanding" (which was the basis upon which the votes of several city councillors depended) would be null and void if the NZEA was approved. In response, Mayor Davis chose to very publicly rescind her vote for that amendment so that the zoning petition would be voted favorably in accordance with the many concessions that had been made during months of negotiation. She took the time to very carefully explain her actions at that time. Some activists did not like the outcome, so they took issue with the procedures. Teague’s Remedy #2 is especially comical in that he wants that single amendment to now be made law without regard to the rather obvious fact that the whole zoning petition may have failed had it been included. Simply noting that "MIT can simply file another zoning petition to remove the NZEA" ignores the fact that it would require a 2/3 majority to do so. Teague’s Remedy #3 simply proves what an arrogant fool Mr. Teague is (as if this was ever in doubt). – Robert Winters
Cambridge Candidate Pages – 2013
Cambridge Candidate Pages – 2013
http://vote.cambridgecivic.com
The biannual Cambridge municipal election is only a couple of days away – Tuesday, November 5. There are 25 candidates running for 9 seats on the Cambridge City Council, and 9 candidates running for 6 seats on the Cambridge School Committee.
In Cambridge’s proportional representation (PR) elections, you may vote for as many candidates as you please, but you must rank your choices. Give a #1 rank to your top choice, a #2 rank to your next choice, etc. Ranking additional candidates will not hurt your top choice(s). If you assign the same rank to more than one candidate, none of those candidates will receive your vote. To prevent this, incorrectly cast ballots will be rejected and returned to you for correction. This way every vote will count as intended.
Many Cambridge voters have not yet decided who should get their #1 vote in each of these races, and many more voters have not yet thought much about who will get their #2, #3, etc. votes.
Almost all of the candidates in this year’s election have provided detailed responses on a number of topics relevant to the offices they seek. Their individual Candidate Pages also provide contact information and links to their own websites. New information is added each day and will continue to be added right up until Election Day.
All of the individual Candidate Pages are accessed by clicking on each candidate’s picture in the photo gallery at http://vote.cambridgecivic.com. Additional election-related information is also provided at this site.
Please read as much as you can about all of the candidates and make informed choices.
Thanks,
Robert Winters
Cambridge Civic Journal
Cambridge Candidates Pages – http://vote.cambridgecivic.com
Cambridge Civic Journal – http://rwinters.com
CCJ Forum – http://cambridgecivic.com
Comments Off on Cambridge Candidate Pages – 2013
November 2, 2013
Some thoughts on the 2013 municipal election campaign on the eve of Election Day
Some thoughts on the 2013 municipal election campaign on the eve of Election Day
Now that it’s just a couple of days before Election Day, it’s a good time to reflect a bit on what many have thought would transpire and what has actually transpired as the campaign has played itself out. Some of the factors that were expected to be significant are these:
- Two incumbent women (Davis, Decker) did not seek reelection. This contributed to the emergence of a large field of City Council candidates – 7 incumbents, 4 repeat challengers, and 14 new challengers – a total of 25 candidates for 9 seats.
- In the School Committee race, two incumbents did not seek reelection (McGovern, Turkel). This created a field of 4 incumbents, 2 repeat challengers, and 3 new challengers – a total of 9 candidates for 6 seats.
- Two prominent zoning petitions in the Central Square and Kendall Square areas in addition to the deliberations of the Red Ribbon Commission and the K2C2 process catapulted the issue of real and perceived development plans for these areas into prominence. Indeed, at least one organization (Cambridge Residents Alliance) was spawned by what they perceived as the threat of new development. On the flip side, the K2C2 process focused on the positive possibilities that might grow out of new investment in these areas through zoning and other incentives. A group called "A Better Cambridge" emerged as an advocate for "smart growth" principles and good urban design.
- The choice of Richard Rossi last December to succeed Robert Healy as City Manager was nearly unanimous and not at all unexpected, but it aggravated some activists who vowed to make this an election issue.
- Some activists introduced initiatives to distinguish themselves as agents of change in the interest of the quality of life of residents.
- Anti-development activists teamed up with local climate change activists to introduce a "net-zero" zoning petition that was timed so as to be a defining issue in the City Council election.
- On the School Committee side, the dichotomy of "excellence vs. equity", especially in the context of the "Innovation Agenda", was once again a defining issue. There was even some talk about a move to eliminate AP classes at the high school in the name of "equity".
So how much of this actually panned out as defining issues in the election? We won’t really know until after the election results are determined, and even then it won’t be possible to read the minds of those who voted to know their motivations. We can, however, make a few pre-election observations.
First, the significance of "two women leaving the Council" doesn’t appear to be carrying the day, though it will certainly be a factor. Marjorie Decker has thrown her wholehearted support to Council candidate Marc McGovern (who in turn has been urging his supporters to vote for Kathleen Kelly to succeed him on the School Committee). Some women voters will certainly look to new candidates Kristen von Hoffmann and Janneke House, but it’s just as likely that voters who prefer woman candidates may vote in significant numbers for incumbents Denise Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom.
On the Kendall and Central fronts, many of us expected the ultra-political Cambridge Residents Alliance (CRA) to do a major mailing filled with their usual frightening misrepresentations as a means of swinging the election in favor of their chosen candidates. It’s possible that such a piece may still arrive in the Monday mail, but this is looking less likely. They appear to have placed all of their political chips on challenger Dennis Carlone to carry their message and claims of the coming "tsunami of development marching down Main Street and Mass. Ave." and wall-to-wall skyscrapers displacing businesses and residents in their wake. It’s not so clear whether many potential voters are drinking the CRA Kool-Aid, but there’s no doubt that some have already drunk their fill.
On the matter of choosing the City Manager with minimal process, opponents have chosen to focus their attention on what appears to have been a minor technical violation of the open meeting law – the only consequence of which was how many names appeared as sponsors of the resolution to hire Richard Rossi. There were going to be 7 votes regardless of the technicalities, and that’s all that really mattered. Nonetheless, the activists have continued to portray this as some kind of betrayal because they were not given maximal opportunity to chime in on the process. In truth, there were only a handful of us who attended the Government Operations Committee hearings on this matter, and anyone who was actually there could clearly see where the outcome was heading. This hasn’t stopped the bloggers from blogging about what they continue to call "a lack of transparency". Apparently, crystal clear is not sufficiently transparent for some activists and their blogger friends. Perhaps they should have come to the public meetings.
Similar claims of lack of transparency and procedural missteps have also been directed at the passage of the MIT-Kendall zoning petition earlier this year. When MIT representatives sent word during City Council deliberations that their "memorandum of understanding" (which was the basis upon which the votes of several city councillors depended) would be null and void if an 11th hour amendment was approved, this led to Mayor Davis’ decision to rescind her vote for that amendment. The zoning petition was then able to pass as expected. Because some activists did not like the outcome, they took issue with the procedures. Do you detect a pattern here?
One entertaining initiative of this past year was the "Teague Petition" – a zoning petition that would have imposed restrictions on some kinds of outdoor lighting. This petition would have had little or no effect on existing problematic intrusive lighting. Some people, myself included, argued that this was a matter better addressed through a separate municipal ordinance than via zoning. The Planning Board and the City Council agreed and there is now a task force coming up with a proposed ordinance. This seems like a far better approach, but it didn’t fit in well with petition supporters who (I believe) had hoped to score big "quality of life" points with their petition in the upcoming election. Sorry, Charlie.
The Net Zero Petition was somewhat more impactful in terms of the election campaign. Though the legality (and certainly the practicality) of this petition was highly questionable, it did lead some City Council candidates (Carlone, Mazen, vanBeuzekom, Seidel, von Hoffmann) to jump fully on the Net Zero bandwagon. Several other prominent challengers (Benzan, McGovern) had serious issues with the proposal, and it’s pretty clear that most of the incumbents were not supporters. The political dynamic has been tricky in that anyone with objections ran the risk of being tarred and feathered by environmental zealots – even if their objections were based on potential threats to new housing construction, including affordable housing. In the end the City Council found a workaround to avoid outright voting down of the petition. They voted to ask the City Manager to form a task force of all stakeholders to navigate a way toward the energy efficiency and other environmental goals upon which there was minimal disagreement. This way the Net Zero crowd was able to claim victory even as their proposal was allowed to quietly expire. It was still a topic at candidate forums, but it became less of a defining issue.
On the School Committee side, there have been a number of prominent issues that have come up at candidate forums and on street corners around the city. What I find most interesting is the way language is being twisted so that candidates can avoid being pinned down as taking a side on the "excellence vs. equity" issue. To be clear, this shouldn’t really be a dichotomy. Everybody agrees with the goals of quality education and fairness to students regardless of background or current ability. The devil is in the details. More specifically, should students be allowed to attend separate classes based on their proven performance and interests? Or should students of all ability remain in the same classroom using such devices as "differentiated instruction" to manage differing abilities? Some people have even gone so far as to recommend that all Advanced Placement (AP) classes be eliminated at the high school. Candidates have generally danced around these issues by using phrases like "quality education for all children" (nobody disagrees) to mean that no provision should be made for advanced students unless the same provisions are made for all students. In short, they’re perfectly happy to deny opportunities to "advanced learners". Personally, I feel that providing opportunities for advanced learners is just as much of a civil right as ensuring that other students be guaranteed a quality education.
There’s more that could be said, but I’ll leave it at that for now. My sense is that we may see a modest increase in turnout in this year’s election – in large part due to all the new candidates. I have a secret list of who I believe will be elected, but I’m not telling. It’s more difficult to make predictions this year for a number of reasons. First, the use of social media tools and other new toys create more possibilities for the younger, more tech-savvy candidates to bring nontraditional voters to the polls. That’s a real wild card in an election. It’s also hard to know how effective candidates really are when they meet voters face-to-face when knocking doors. Some candidates will benefit greatly from that kind of contact and only they know how well they have been received. – Robert Winters
October 31, 2013
Episode 16 of Cambridge InsideOut with City Council candidates Denise Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom
Episode 16 of Cambridge InsideOut with City Council candidates Denise Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom. This aired on Oct 29, 2013 at 6:00pm.
Comments Off on Episode 16 of Cambridge InsideOut with City Council candidates Denise Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom
October 21, 2013
Another Monday – Oct 21, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights
Another Monday – Oct 21, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights
As Election Day draws near, the business of the City continues. Here are a few items of interest:
The City Manager’s Agenda features 10 responses to the 34 items on "Awaiting Report". I’m sure the city councillors will do their best to grow the list back again with what are often questionable requests that could be more easily answered in person.
Manager’s Agenda #18. Transmitting communication from Richard C. Rossi, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 13-34, regarding appointing a task force to further examine the Connolly Petition.
It’s been entertaining to watch the spin associated with this whole matter. The bottom line is that few people disagree with the concept of encouraging highly energy efficient building construction, and the response from the City Manager reflects this. However, the Connolly Petition was, in fact, a zoning petition that would have mandated that any new development over a modest size not only meet energy efficiency standards (which many new buildings already do), but also that any energy needs that cannot be met on-site instead be purchased from a restricted list of suppliers and/or supplemented by the purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs). The petition also specifically mandated that this should apply to every tenant in the new buildings. [Note – I have repeatedly suggested that this goes well beyond what can be legally mandated via zoning.]
On the substance of the Connolly Petition, the majority of the City Council disagreed with the petition as drafted. This has been made clear in responses in candidate forums and in statements in the Cambridge Chronicle. Most challengers in this year’s election have also made clear that they could not support the petition as drafted. The Mayor and City Manager convened a forum of experts a few weeks ago at the Cambridge Public Library and these experts generally disagreed with the substance of the Connolly Petition. The establishment of this task force can only be viewed as a way to craft an alternative that could actually be supported – and not in any way as what Mr. Connolly is now calling "a huge win for the hundreds of residents who signed on to our online petition." This is delusional at best.
My sense is that this task force will likely focus not only on new construction (which, let’s face it, is what many of the petitioners wanted to block), but on developing policies and programs applicable to all Cambridge buildings. If this can "re-energize" some of the initial efforts of the Cambridge Energy Alliance and tap into grant money to help homeowners and other property owners to make their buildings more energy efficient, then this will be an outcome we can all support. The Connolly Petition was a lemon, but the City administration will make some lemonade.
Applications & Petitions #1. A zoning petition has been filed by Christopher H. Lutz, et al. requesting the City Council to amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Cambridge by rezoning an area on the northern border of Richdale Avenue from Upland Road to Walden Street from its C1-A designation to residential C-1.
Applications & Petitions #2. A zoning petition has been filed by John Chun, et al. requesting the City Council amend the Zoning Map of the City of Cambridge in the entire district currently zoned Residence B located in the Cambridge Highlands neighborhood, situated north of Concord Avenue, south of and adjacent to the Blair Pond Reservation, and east of and adjacent to the municipal boundary with the Town of Belmont by deleting the designation Residence B and substituting therefore a designation of Residence A-2.
Order #5. That the City Council go on record re-filing a petition to amend the Zoning Ordinance in Section 17.20 to increase the setback requirement abutting Linear Park and to clarify form and density language with the residential neighborhood. Councillor Maher
That’s three more zoning petitions in the queue.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to consult with the appropriate City personnel, City partners, and the Governor’s Office to develop a contingency plan to ensure that Cambridge residents who see part or all of their rent subsidized by federal funding will not see their housing jeopardized in the event of a future shutdown of the federal government. Vice Mayor Simmons
Even though the shutdown of the federal government is over for the moment, this Order illustrates the dilemma that state and local officials face if and when we go through this again. Cambridge has long been supportive of public housing options within Cambridge, but much of this housing is funded by sources outside of Cambridge. If the flow of money is restricted, it cannot be easily replaced by local revenue sources. Vice Mayor Simmons’ order is specifically about the Section 8 program (rental vouchers), but the hard reality is that federal policies and Congressional dysfunction can quickly disrupt local housing options. The Order calls for a contingency plan, but the local options for response are limited.
Committee Report #3. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves, Chair of the University Relations Committee, for a public meeting held on Dec 7, 2012 to tour Harvard University.
Committee Report #4. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves, Chair of the University Relations Committee, for a public meeting held on Mar 5, 2013 to tour Lesley University.
Committee Report #5. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves, Chair of the University Relations Committee, for a public meeting held on Apr 5, 2013 toured the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
I note these more for amusement than anything else. For a long time now I have noted on the City Council Committees page regarding the University Relations Committee: "No reports have been filed by this committee. Until such time as reports are filed, it will be assumed that this committee has not actually met." The committee has apparently met 8 times dating back 18 months (Apr 2012), but these are the first reports being filed. Perhaps we’ll see the other five reports on the eve of Election Day. – Robert Winters