Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

May 6, 2013

Bikes and More on the May 6 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,cycling — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 1:22 am

Bikes and More on the May 6 Cambridge City Council Agenda

There will be a 5:00pm Special Presentation prior to the regular City Council meeting to thank all first responders and all public safety officials who were involved in the events that began with the Marathon Day bombings. After that, a few items seem interesting:

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to revised text of the Bicycle Parking Zoning Petition.

Unfinished Business #15. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public hearing held on Apr 3, 2013 to discuss an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to create a new Section 6.100 Bicycle Parking, and to create a new definition for Bicycle Parking in Article 2.000, modify the yard standards in Article 5.000 as they relate to bicycle parking and modifying various sections of Article 6.000 to remove references to bicycle parking. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after May 6, 2013. Planning Board hearing held Mar 19, 2013. Petition expires June 17, 2013.

I’m not sure whether the City Council will be voting yet on this proposal, but I have to say that the response from CDD relative to the revised test is somewhat nonresponsive. Among other things, the issue was raised at an Ordinance Committee hearing whether requirements for bicycle parking should also apply to buildings such as triple-deckers that undergo complete renovation as part of a condominium conversion. The CDD response correctly states that unless the building associated with the project is enlarged it would not be defensible to require bicycle parking. However, the main issue raised at the Ordinance Committee hearing pertained to conversions where basement and other space not previously inhabited becomes an occupied part of one or more of the condos. This is, in fact, pretty standard practice for such projects and the new space is often taken from what previously had been storage space – including space where bicycles would have been stored. This seems totally contradictory. On the one hand the City correctly states that there’s a dire need for bicycle parking in residential buildings, yet we are supposed to look the other way when existing space for bicycle storage is removed in order to increase the market price of new condominiums.

Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 13-49, regarding a report on recommendations for the next steps on updating the City’s nexus study.

I found these few sentences from Brian Murphy’s letter especially interesting: "The incentive zoning contribution rate was initially set (in 1988) at $3.00 per square foot, and, after periodic adjustments by the Affordable Housing Trust based upon changes in the consumer price index, is currently $4.44 per square foot. Proceeds from the housing contributions are used by the Trust to preserve and expand the supply of affordable housing. The City last reexamined the incentive housing contribution rate in 2002 when a second nexus study was completed. The 2002 study found that the housing contribution rate would have had to be increased to $7.83 per square foot to adequately address the impact of new development on market rents. However, after some discussion, no action was taken in response to this study."

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the City Solicitor to clarify whether private driveways and apartment garages may be rented to car owners that are unrelated to the property and by what process can these spaces be legally rented.

Though the motivation for this Order was to recognize the possibility of sharing parking facilities, it may be interesting to hear the City’s response regarding how this may relate to the City’s Vehicle Trip Reduction Ordinance.

Resolution #28. Congratulations to the Cambridge Health Alliance on their affiliation with the Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital.   Mayor Davis

This reminded me of something John O’Brien, former CEO of the Cambridge Health Alliance, once told me: "In this business, you either marry or you die."

Order #5. That the City Council meet in the Government Operations and Rules Committee with the purpose of discussing open space, transportation, and workforce readiness initiatives.   Councillor Toomey and Mayor Davis

This Order apparently is an attempt to respond to the last-minute amendment to the recent MIT/Kendall Square zoning petition that was perceived as punishing neighbors who worked cooperatively and constructively in the rezoning process. Some councillors have some obligation to explain why they voted for that amendment, and maybe this Order will provide a mechanism for these councillors to be taken to task and for possible corrective action to be taken.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the appropriate departments as to the feasibility of implementing a program that makes cycling a more affordable, accessible and practical commuting option for low-income residents in the City of Cambridge.   Councillor Cheung

Give me a break. Buy yourself a solid old bike for cheap, get a good lock, and you’re good to go. Is this really something that requires yet another City program? The idea is a good one, but this really is something best handled outside of government.

Order #8. That the matter of Cambridge City Council Rule 16 pertaining to "Reconsideration of a Vote" be referred to the Government Operations and Rules Committee for review and revision.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

Sounds like a councillor didn’t like a recent vote. Time to change the rules.

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee, for a public meeting held on Apr 9, 2013 to assess how other cities support neighborhood groups and examine how Cambridge could make use of these practices.

This was an interesting meeting. The report only barely captures the tone of the meeting which included at least some testimony about whether established neighborhood groups legitimately represent neighborhoods. Also unanswered (but worth answering) is the question of how the neighborhood school programs can better be utilized as a vehicle for City support for neighborhood initiatives. – Robert Winters

April 28, 2013

Moving On – April 29, 2013 Cambridge City Council meeting agenda highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , — Robert Winters @ 11:10 pm

April 29, 2013 Cambridge City Council meeting agenda highlights

Here are the agenda items that seem interesting:

Reconsideration #1. Councillor Maher has notified the City Clerk of his intention to move reconsideration on the vote taken on Apr 22, 2013 to adopt an order for a curb cut at the premises numbered 16 Channing Street.

I hope there was no premature rejoicing by Channing Street neighbors when this was voted last week with two councillors absent. The matter passed on a 4-3-2 vote, so it never achieved a majority of the full City Council. Regardless of the merits of the petition, its disposition should not be determined by the fact that two councillors had to be on Beacon Hill to vote on the State Budget. This deserved a proper vote and Councillor Maher has appropriately filed for Reconsideration.

Last week also saw the introduction of the City’s FY2014 Budget, and the following week’s agenda usually contains a number of Capital Budget orders in order to set the table prior to the annual Budget Hearings (Apr 30 and May 9). Here are this year’s Capital Budget items:

Manager’s Agenda #1. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $2,180,000 to provide funds to supplement other financing sources for improvements to the Cambridge Common.

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $1,000,000 to provide funds for the reconstruction of several streets and sidewalks.

Manager’s Agenda #3. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $54,658,000 to provide funds for construction of sewer separation, stormwater management and combined sewer overflow reduction elimination improvements within the City’s Alewife Watershed, Harvard Square, Agassiz, and Cherry Street/South Massachusetts Avenue areas as well as the Sewer Capital Repairs Program.

Manager’s Agenda #4. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow an additional $500,000 to provide funds for improvements to the Kendall Square area including Main Street between Broadway and Ames Street including the reconstruction of streets and sidewalks and the installation of new pedestrian-scale public lighting, street furniture, trees, and other beautification measures.

It’s interesting to view these orders over the years as a measure of the gradual rebuilding of City assets. For example, last year’s Capital Budget orders totaled $17,442,670 for such things as replacement of the roofs on City Hall, and the Ryan Garage and Simard Buildings at Public Works; Kendall Square reconstruction of streets and sidewalks, lighting, street furniture, trees, and other beautification measures; acquisition of a ladder truck and pumper; synthetic field surfaces on the soccer fields at Danehy Park; and a variety of sewer separation and stormwater projects within the City’s Alewife watershed. This year’s appropriations are much greater and are dominated by sewers – things upon which we all depend but will likely never see.

Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $40,000 from Free Cash to the General Fund Public Works Other Ordinary Maintenance account appropriation will fund the feasibility study for the Foundry building. Additional, this request is in response to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-87 and 12-105 as well as several other Council Orders related to this matter.

The Foundry Building in East Cambridge came to the City as a result of the Alexandria zoning petition. I have been told that the building has been available for occupancy and sitting vacant as potential revenue is lost and potential occupants have been waiting. Perhaps this appropriation together with some cooperation among city councillors will finally get things moving.

Applications & Petitions #4. A zoning petition has been received from Jenny Popper-Keizer, et al., requesting the City Council amend the Zoning Ordinance and Map from SD-8A to Residence C-1 in the area bounded by Allston Street to the north, Putnam Avenue to the south, Sidney Street to the west and Waverly Street to the east.

This petition is clearly inspired by the proposed housing development at 240 Sidney Street, 40 Allston Street, and 618 Grove Avenue that has already had a public hearing before the Planning Board. There’s an online petition that preceded the zoning petition that reads as follows: "Fulmore Park is the cornerstone of a family neighborhood with about 45 homes surrounding it. Most of these are triple deckers with a couple of two family homes thrown in. The development at 240 Sidney Street aims to build 107 apartment buildings [they meant to say "apartments"] along the eastern edge of the park. The units are studio, one and two bedroom apartments all meant for rental not to create owner-occupied or family friendly homes. This will irreversibly change the character of the neighborhood. ….. Adding more traffic to this street is not in the interest of public safety and should be disallowed. ….. Parking in the on-site garage is rented separately from the apartments. This will create a glut of new residents who choose the much less expensive resident permit rather than renting a spot in the garage of their building. Parking is already congested in the area and will become impossible if this is allowed to pass. Finally the developer has made no attempt to contact abutters to solicit feedback about the project before submitting the plans for approval. We cannot let developers slide by without proper community outreach."

The petition focuses on loss of parking, increased traffic, the somewhat vague "change the character of the neighborhood", and lack of sufficient process. The parking issue is interesting primarily because the developers sought from the Planning Board a reduction in required parking. There has been a curious mixture of actual trends and wishful thinking of late when it comes to the matter of parking for new residential developments. While it’s true that more households are going without cars, it’s a valid concern that when parking is not included in new housing, at least some of the new residents will store their cars on the streets ($25/year permit fee) instead of paying exorbitant fees to park on premises. Honestly, that’s what I would do. The claims of burdensome increases in traffic seem ill-founded. Residential developments generally don’t have major impacts on traffic, especially if many of the residents exhibit similar behavior to other Cambridge residents in walking and biking to work.

The "change the character of the neighborhood" concern is the one I find most interesting. Neighborhoods are more about people than buildings, so it’s a little hard to figure what kind of change is the offense here. Perhaps it’s the potential influx of young professionals (they give me the willies, too), but it’s probably the case that most of the new residents would be much like the people who have been bidding up and buying homes throughout Cambridgeport and the rest of Cambridge for the last decade and more. If that’s the objection, then it’s fair to say that this is not an issue of zoning.

Resolution #6. Resolution on the death of Krystle M. Campbell.   Councillor Cheung

Resolution #7. Resolution on the death of Martin Richard.   Councillor Cheung

Resolution #8. Resolution on the death of Lu Lingzi.   Councillor Cheung

Resolution #11. Thanks to MIT and public safety officials who organized the memorial service for Officer Sean Collier and sympathy to MIT community in this time of loss.   Mayor Davis

The events of the last two weeks have hit most of us pretty close to home. In addition to the deaths of these four individuals, many have been maimed, including a number of Cambridge residents known to many of us. When the city was effectively shut down during the hunt for the surviving murderer, some people worried that we were in a "police state," but one friend of mine appropriately characterized it as "an act of mass cooperation with law enforcement." I think that captures it perfectly, and I hope that spirit of cooperation continues. This chapter began for me when, after an 8-mile hike with AMC Local Walks, I was under Copley Square when the bombs exploded. This past Saturday I led another AMC hike in the Middlesex Fells, and I’ve chosen to close this horrible chapter on that positive note. I hope we never have to go through anything like this again.

Order #1. That the City Council refer to the Ordinance Committee and the Planning Board, for hearing and report, the proposed changes to the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance relating to rainwater separation in residential buildings.   Councillor Kelley

I’m pretty sure the genesis of this proposal was a request last year from one resident who wanted to replace his flat roof with a pitched roof. Overall, the proposed zoning change contains some interesting ideas and deserves consideration.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to instruct the City Solicitor to clarify the expiration date for zoning petitions filed in the City of Cambridge – either 90 days from the date of the first City Planning Board meeting or 90 days from the first City Council Ordinance Committee meeting.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

Let’s just make this simple. There is no need for further clarification. Simply propose a minor zoning amendment to change Section 1.52 of the City’s zoning ordinance to replace "within ninety (90) days after the Planning Board’s hearing" to "within ninety (90) days after the initial Ordinance Committee hearing". That makes the state law and the city ordinance consistent – problem solved.

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to direct the City Solicitor to clarify whether private driveways and apartment garages may be rented to car owners that are unrelated to the property and by what process can these spaces be legally rented.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

The simple answer is that they generally cannot be rented, but we all know people who do rent them out. It’s one thing to let a friend or neighbor park in your driveway, but it’s a whole ‘nuther matter when you’re essentially running a commercial enterprise by deriving income in this manner. It also violates the City’s Vehicle Trip Reduction Ordinance.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to provide to the Cambridge City Council an explanation of how the City of Cambridge Police Department and the FBI work together to collect and share local intelligence information and respond to reports on individuals that are identified as potential terrorists.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

This should receive a fine response from Councillor Decker and the ACLU gang, but it’s a legitimate question and concern. – Robert Winters

April 9, 2013

MIT/Kendall Night at City Hall – Apr 8, 2013 City Council meeting (updated)

Filed under: City Council,Kendall Square,MIT — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 9:40 am

MIT/Kendall Night at City Hall – Apr 8, 2013 City Council meeting

Though there are a few other items on the agenda, this meeting is clearly centered on the potential ordination of the MIT/Kendall zoning petition that was introduced in December 2012, but which has actually been around, debated, and refined since its original introduction over two years ago. There have been many meetings of the Ordinance Committee and the Planning Board on the substance of this petition plus volumes of input from the public.

The central agenda item is this:

Unfinished Business #15. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Mar 7, 2013 to continue discussions on the petition by MIT to create a new Section 13.80 Planned Unit Development 5 (PUD-5) District; specifically to discuss Uses, Incentive Zoning, Community Fund, Housing and Sustainability. A presentation will be made by the Executive Director of Historical Commission on historic building. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after Apr 1, 2013. Planning Board hearing held Jan 15, 2013. Petition expires Apr 15, 2013.

A related Order from Councillor Decker highlights one feature that is now part of the revised language of the petition:

Order #1. That the text of the MIT Zoning Petition be amended to increase the inclusionary housing from 15% to 18%.   Councillor Decker

The last Ordinance Committee report on this matter is this:

Committee Report #3. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Apr 2, 2013 to continue discussion on the petition by MIT to create a new Section 13.80 Planned Unit Development 5 (PUD-5) District; said report contains text of zoning language with changes since the Planning Board referral and a draft letter of commitment.

Though there may be other efforts to amend the proposed zoning amendment on the floor, the latest version as submitted is here:

Communications & Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received from Councillor David Maher transmitting additional information received from Steven C. Marsh, Managing Director, Real Estate MITIMCo., regarding the MIT revised draft zoning amendment, a revised commitment letter and a table providing an overview of the public benefits contained in the revised commitment letter and the revised draft zoning ordinance amendments. [HTML Version of Revised Petition & Letter of Commitment]

There is much that could be said at this point about the MIT/Kendall Petition. In spite of questionable claims of MIT faculty opposition to the proposal, most of the letters from the MIT faculty and administration have shown clear support. Many of the suggestions of the East Cambridge Planning Team have been incorporated into the proposal. There are legitimate arguments that can be made in favor of MIT providing additional housing for graduate students and post-docs, but there is no reason why that housing should be located in Kendall Square. There is also an ongoing analysis within MIT to determine the best ways to address these housing needs, and there is every reason to believe that MIT will act in good faith to ultimately do what’s in the best interest of its students. This may well mean that new housing will be constructed at the opposite end of the MIT campus.

The arguments of naysayers as this matter heads into its final stage have focused on two red herrings – graduate student housing and claims that the plan does not mandate sufficient "sustainability" requirements. When you consider the fact that none of the new buildings in this PUD-5 zone have actually yet been designed, it makes you wonder what blueprints these naysayers have been consulting. The misinformation has all the earmarks of political organizing during a municipal election year.

On balance, the MIT/Kendall Petition, as amended, is a good plan and it should be ordained. MIT has responded well to most of the requests of City staff and the elected officials. If two-thirds of the City Council see fit to pass the zoning amendment, they should be congratulated for keeping their eye on the many positive benefits of the plan and for navigating wisely through a sea of misinformation spread by reactionaries and political wannabes. There’s more to being a good elected official than just being able to say NO to everything. – Robert Winters

Apr 8 update on the MIT/Kendall Petition

The MIT/Kendall zoning petition was ordained as amended on a 7-1-1 vote with Councillor vanBeuzekom voting NO (as expected) and Vice Mayor Simmons voting PRESENT. The revised Letter of Commitment from MIT was approved unanimously.

Prior to final ordination a series of amendments were proposed by several councillors. Councillor Kelley objected strenuously to the late arrival of the proposed amendments and, in doing so, he came across as the smartest guy in the room. There were so many opportunities to propose amendments during the months, weeks, and days leading to this vote, that there was no excuse for trying to rush these amendments through. Nothing good came of it.

The late parade of amendments began with Councillor Cheung proposing some modifications of the percentages in section 13.83.2(d). This squeaked by on a 5-4 vote with Councillors Cheung, Decker, Reeves, Simmons, and vanBeuzekom voting in favor. Next came Councillor Cheung’s amendment to increase the maximum height of the proposed residential tower from 300 ft. to 350 ft. That failed on a 4-5 vote with Councillors Cheung, Reeves, Simmons, and vanBeuzekom voting in favor.

Then Councillor vanBeuzekom proposed a reduction in the maximum permissible nighttime noise levels from 65db to 55db. Councillor Kelley opined that this was a matter that should be viewed in a citywide context. The amendment failed 4-5 with Councillors Cheung, Simmons, vanBeuzekom, and Mayor Davis voting in favor. The next amendment by Councillor vanBeuzekom to require "net zero" energy standards enjoyed a temporary victory on a 5-3-1 vote with Councillors Cheung, Decker, Simmons, vanBeuzekom, and Mayor Davis voting YES; Councillors Kelley, Maher, and Toomey voting NO; and Councillor Reeves voting PRESENT. Later in the meeting, when informed that this burden could threaten MIT’s other commitments, Mayor Davis reluctantly asked to change her vote from YES to PRESENT which defeated the amendment 4-3-2. This was a vote change that Mayor Davis clearly did not relish, but she did it for the greater goal of passing the entire package.

The last amendment was from Councillor Decker and will likely be the one that brings some repercussions. She proposed that the $10 million that was to be dedicated to a Community Fund be transferred to a general mitigation fund not tied in any way to the K2C2 principles. It is my understanding that this has the effect of cutting out the role of people from the adjacent neighborhood organizations in the mitigation fund. The amendment passed on a 5-4 vote with Councillors Cheung, Decker, Reeves, Simmons, and vanBeuzekom voting in favor.

It was also revealed that Councillor Decker’s Order #1 to increase the Inclusionary Zoning percentage from 15% to 18% was meant to be a citywide proposal. She withdrew her Order and will resubmit it as a citywide proposal at a later date. – RW

March 19, 2013

Letter from Tom Stohlman (Mar 19, 2013)

Filed under: City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 10:47 am

To the City Council,

The City Charter says:
"Except in the cases of executive sessions authorized by section twenty-three A of chapter thirty-nine, all meetings of the city council shall be open to the press and to the public, and the rules of the city council shall provide that citizens and employees of the city shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any such meeting in regard to any matter considered thereat."

It appears sometime in the past, someone crafted an interpretation of these words which would allow the City Council to meet and not give citizens "a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any such meeting in regard to any matter considered thereat." I’m sure it may have been for some good reason along the lines of, "We, the City Council, need to be able to meet and discuss matters before us without devoting the whole meeting to listening to the public talk about matters before us."

Thus the "roundtable" meeting was born. I think it was illegal then and I think it is illegal now.

The City Council Rules were voted without (much) debate at the beginning of your term, and reflect the wishes of some long-gone previous incarnation of the City Council. The rules are broken, in multiple senses of the phrase. The rules are ignored when they get in the way. The rules are invoked inconsistently to stifle debate. The rules are also broken if they actually keep you from doing your job.

I know you all and I know you are capable of having a discussion among yourselves and giving the public "a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any such meeting in regard to any matter considered thereat." It’s your meeting and you control it, not some long-gone previous incarnation of the City Council, not the City Manager, not the City Solicitor, and not the public.

The City Charter gives you that power. All it asks in return is that you do what it says. I recognize that my Charter right must be invoked reasonably and I want you to devote as much time as you can to discussing this among yourselves in whatever way you find most useful. Even if the Charter didn’t require it, you should open all your meetings (and sub-committee meetings) to whatever form of public communication (speech, TV, Internet, letters, emails, etc., etc.) is reasonably available and you should give the public a reasonable amount of time to be heard (literally).

I ask that you get a fresh start, and embrace the spirit of the Charter’s words this Friday at 9:30am. Find a way to hear the public while having a (real) discussion among yourselves and City staff about this important matter before you, the MIT PUD5 Zoning Amendment.

Best,

Tom Stohlman
19 Channing Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
617-547-5246
tstohlman@alum.mit.edu

March 18, 2013

Evacuation Day at City Hall – March 18 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,City Council,planning — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 12:57 am

Evacuation Day at City Hall – March 18 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Here are what seem to be the highlights for this Monday’s City Council meeting grouped by topic:

Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following persons as members of the Planning Board for 3-year terms effective Mar 13, 2013:
Tom Sieniewicz (Full Member)
Steven Cohen (Full Member)
Catherine Preston Connolly (Associate Member)

Resolution #15. Thanks to Thomas W. Anninger for his years of service as a member of the Cambridge Planning Board.   Councillor Maher

Though the Planning Board has been short a few members lately, it’s been functioning like a well-oiled machine. Tom Anninger’s exit from the Board is a real loss, but the newly appointed members appear to be very qualified and should prove to be excellent additions. They’ll arrive just in time for some serious discussions about possible plans for Central Square and other areas that were part of the recent K2C2 study. It is noteworthy that the recent January 7 Order #4 strongly urged the City Manager to fill the two vacancies on the Planning Board with people "who have a background in, or association with, the skilled labor and building trades." None of the three appointees seem to fit that description, and that’s probably a good thing.

Manager’s Agenda #16. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the block rates for water consumption and sewer use for the period beginning Apr 1, 2013 and ending Mar 31, 2014.

City Manager Order
Agenda Item No. 16A     Mar 18, 2013
ORDERED: That the following block rate for water consumption and sewer use in the City of Cambridge be in effect for the period beginning Apr 1, 2013 and ending Mar 31, 2014.

  Annual Consumption* FY13
Water Rate		 FY14 Proposed
Water Rate		 FY13
Sewer Rate		 FY14 Proposed
Sewer Rate
Block 1 0 – 40 CcF $3.02 $3.02 $7.86 $8.19
Block 2 41 – 400 CcF $3.24 $3.24 $8.32 $8.67
Block 3 401 – 2,000 CcF $3.44 $3.44 $8.93 $9.31
Block 4 2,001 – 10,000 CcF $3.65 $3.65 $9.62 $10.02
Block 5 Over 10,000 CcF $3.96 $3.96 $10.23 $10.66

*All rates are per CcF. CcF is an abbreviation of 100 cubic feet. One CcF is approximately 750 gallons; and be it further

This marks the 4th straight year for these water rates, i.e. no increases for three years from the level set for FY11. This is the first increase in the sewer rate after two consecutive years of no increases.

Manager’s Agenda #17. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the Planning Board recommendation on the MIT-Kendall Square Zoning Petition.

Committee Report #4. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Feb 26, 2013 to continue discussions on the petition by MIT to create a new Section 13.80 Planned Unit Development 5 (PUD-5) District; specifically to discuss the built form, including FAR, Height, Footplates, Open Space and Parking.

Committee Report #6. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Mar 7, 2013 to continue discussions on the petition by MIT to create a new Section 13.80 Planned Unit Development 5 (PUD-5) District; specifically to discuss Uses, Incentive Zoning, Community Fund, Housing and Sustainability. A presentation will be made by the Executive Director of Historical Commission on historic building.

Order #11. That a one-time suspension of Council Rule 23B be allowed, for the broadcast of the Fri, Mar 22nd, 9:30am Ordinance Committee Meeting (a meeting to discuss issues relating to the MIT PUD-5 zoning petition).   Councillor vanBeuzekom

As a group, these are probably the most significant items on the agenda. The Council will most likely pass the MIT/Kendall petition to a 2nd Reading in order to get it in the queue for possible ordination in a few weeks. The Ordinance Committee is still deliberating the issue, and it will surprise no one if there are additional tweaks to the zoning language before the matter comes to a final vote.

One yet unresolved issue is the matter of how MIT will respond to demands for additional on-campus and near-campus housing for graduate students and post-docs. It’s a legitimate question, and the MIT administration is seriously analyzing this now. The question of whether this housing should be intertwined with the zoning petition is somewhat unclear, especially since MIT has numerous other options for where such housing could be constructed if their analysis proves the need. It’s unfortunate that this issue has been latched onto by at least one new Council candidate who has about as much familiarity with MIT as a fish has with a bicycle.

Applications & Petitions #6. A zoning petition has been received from Charles D. Teague, et al., requesting the City Council to amend the Zoning Ordinance to clarify existing law so that said law can be enforced by inserting text after Section 7.20 Illumination, with the existing text to be retained and labeled as Section 7.23 Lighting Restrictions for Residential Districts.

Yup, another zoning petition, and a pretty anticlimactic one after the Forest City petition and the MIT/Kendall petitions that some have used to define their political campaigns.

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council and the Cambridge community on the current status, to the extent that it is possible, of the investigation into the June 3, 2012 murder of Charlene Holmes.   Vice Mayor Simmons

I am grateful to Vice Mayor Simmons for bringing this issue back into public view. It is incredibly disturbing to think that this cold-blooded murder in front of witnesses is still unresolved almost a year later.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Department of Public Works as to the feasibility of installing fiber-optic conduits when doing sewer reconstruction and report back to the City Council.   Councillor Cheung and Councillor vanBeuzekom

The fact is that these fiber-optic conduits are sometimes run inside the sewers. Don’t worry, you won’t see that stuff and it won’t get all over your data.

Order #9. That the conversion of further soccer fields at Danehy Park to artificial turf be delayed until further study of the impact of artificial turf on player’s health be completed along with a report which quantifies the decreased use of the more fragile grass playing fields throughout the city as a result of the installation of artificial turf playing fields be prepared by the Recreation Department.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

Committee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee, for a public meeting held on Feb 5, 2013 to discuss the long-term impact of grass versus artificial turf at Danehy Park.

Though I have not been following this issue, the committee report makes clear that this is a Big Issue for a lot of people – especially the soccer crowd. It does seem a bit weird that Councillor vanBeuzekom is bringing up the concern that "this infill material may contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates, benzene, benzothiazole and other toxic derivatives that may present a health risk to residents" as justification for delaying the installation. Is this out of concern for health risks or just opposition to replacing natural grass with artificial turf? I’ll go with the majority of soccer players. If they’re OK with it, then go for it.

Order #10. That the City Manager is requested to offer City of Cambridge engineering expertise to the City of Belmont so that both cities may work together to ensure that the residents of Cambridge, Belmont and Arlington be protected from the impacts of flooding in Alewife SubWatershed and report back to the City Council.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

On the surface, this certainly seems like a good idea. I always wonder whether the real intention of Orders like this is to delay development proposals or whether there are serious environmental concerns. In matters such as this we also get a clear view of how lacking the regional planning can sometimes be in these parts. Instead, we talk about loaning our expertise to neighboring towns.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Feb 6, 2013 to receive a briefing on the recommendations of the C2 Report.

There’s also a Roundtable City Council meeting coming up on Wed, Mar 27 at 5:30pm on the report of the Central Square Advisory Committee 2011/2012. This is pretty important stuff. Some choose to see only danger and fear of change; while others see opportunity. I count myself in the latter group. The actual zoning recommendations yet to come out of CDD are eagerly awaited. – Robert Winters

Quick Notes on what went down at the Mar 18 City Council meeting:

1) Many people showed up to protest the impending termination of the Longy School’s Preparatory and Continuing Studies program. The City Council’s University Relations Committee will address this at a meeting on Wed, Mar 20 at 2:00pm in the Sullivan Chamber of City Hall.

2) Throngs of soccer players, parents, and coaches came out to question Councillor vanBeuzekom’s Order #9 that recommended delaying the installation of artificial turf on soccer fields at Danehy Park. The Order was subsequently withdrawn. (It would likely have been defeated.)

3) Open Houses on the MIT/Kendall Square Initiative (zoning petition) are scheduled for Sat, Mar 23 from 10:00am to noon and Tues, Mar 26 from 6:00pm to 8:00pm at One Broadway, 1st Floor, next to Firebrand Saints. Look for the blue windows.

MIT/Kendall Open House

4) There was a somewhat disjointed discussion on the appropriateness of a proposed Ordinance Committee roundtable meeting this Fri, Mar 22 at 9:30am to discuss the details of the MIT/Kendall petition. The debate centered on whether it should be televised and whether public comment should be permitted. The procedural compromise was to change this to a City Council roundtable meeting (which are not televised and where public comment is not permitted). Ordinance Committee Chair David Maher promised that there would be another Ordinance Committee meeting on this topic prior to a final vote on ordination. It was also stated that this petition will expire on April 15 rather than April 24 as previously established. Apparently even though state law sets the deadline at 90 days after its first Ordinance Committee hearing, section 1.52 of the City’s zoning ordinance sets the deadline at 90 days after its initial Planning Board hearing (who knew?). The Law Dept. recommended the Apr 15 deadline. After the discussion the City Council passed the petition to a 2nd Reading. This puts it in the queue to be voted for ordination after Mar 28 and before the Apr 15 expiration date.

5) Councillor Decker announced that the state has designated Homeowners Rehab, Inc. (HRI) as the agency to negotiate the sale of the 2 Mt. Auburn St. housing currently owned and managed by Harvard University. She indicated some hope that good news may follow regarding the long-term affordability for tenants of this building. – RW (additions and corrections welcome)

March 4, 2013

In Like A Lamb – March 4 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 1:32 am

In Like A Lamb – March 4 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

February went out like a lion last week with the signing of a 3-year contract with Manager-to-be Richard Rossi and the unanimous ordination of the Forest City zoning petition that had been the subject of much contrived controversy. In contrast, March arrives in comparative calm. Here’s what caught my attention this week:

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate City departments to expand enforcement of the prohibition on Cambridge pick-ups by non-Cambridge cabs not specifically called to Cambridge.   Councillor Cheung

Councillor Cheung’s Order asks "to expand enforcement of the prohibition on Cambridge pick-ups by non-Cambridge cabs not specifically called to Cambridge." Well, it’s in the regulations, as they say. That said, doesn’t it seem ridiculous that taxi service is completely balkanized with local city councils dictating who can and cannot pick up fares in their towns? Shouldn’t there be some kind of compact among the various municipalities of Greater Boston – like a taxi free trade zone? I would personally take it a step further and eliminate taxi medallions completely. Whoever can offer the best service at the lowest price should get the business – not who pays the most for a medallion.

Order #3. That the Chair of the Civic Unity Committee is requested to inform the City Council of plans to hold a committee meeting to discuss the Monteiro case and any lessons to be learned from it prior to the current City Manager’s leaving office.   Councillor Kelley

Beat that dead horse, Councillor Kelley. The chief lesson learned should be the importance of jury selection.

Three-fifthsOrder #4. That the City Manager is requested to confer with relevant City staff and report back to the City Council on the feasibility of creating a development program, whether through density bonuses or other means, where residents of new buildings would not be allowed to obtain on-street City parking stickers.   Councillor Kelley

I believe the illegality of this idea has already been settled, but why not get creative? How about we give those residents three-fifths of a parking sticker in honor of their less-than-citizenship status. It should hold us until the 13th Amendment to the City’s Plan E Charter is ratified by two-thirds of the city’s neighborhoods.

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Information Technology Department to explore the possibility of adding an RSS feed feature to all of the City of Cambridge websites.   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I suppose there’s a way to do that, but I don’t believe the City of Cambridge uses a content management system (CMS) like a typical blog might have. I’m guessing here that Councillor vanBeuzekom wants the content of these pages to be fed directly into news aggregators and the like. Having played around this weekend with RSS feeds for the CCJ site, I know that it’s possible to do this (assuming I haven’t made any huge errors), but it seems like a rather poor idea to do this for "all of the City of Cambridge websites" as stated in the Order. There are, however, particular City web pages where important updates and events are posted. Those pages should have all the appropriate features added to make them easy to be picked up by the various electronic robots roaming the internets.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #1. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a copy of a letter sent to Attorney Kathryn Brown of Forest City Boston requesting clarifying language contained in the "Letter of Commitment".

I’ve been reading with amusement an account elsewhere that makes this letter into some kind of controversy and a validation of things discussed during last week’s vote on the Forest City petition. To paraphrase Dr. Freud, sometimes a letter is just a letter.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #2. A communication was received from Councillor Craig Kelley regarding discussion about pending lawsuits.

I sometimes wonder if some of our elected councillors are working against the interest of the City and its residents. – RW

February 24, 2013

And the Oscar goes to…. Feb 25, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 11:11 pm

And the Oscar goes to…. Feb 25, 2013 Cambridge City Council Agenda Highlights

There are a few major items on the agenda this week: (1) The possible signing of a 3-year contract with Rich Rossi as the next City Manager (starting July 1), and (2) a possible vote on ordination of the Forest City zoning petition. Starting with the big items:

Richard RossiCommittee Report #1. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Government Operations and Rules Committee, for a public meeting held on Feb 13, 2013 to continue discussions with Attorney Elizabeth Valerio, representing the City Council in negotiations with the next City Manager, Richard Rossi.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #2. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a copy of a letter sent to Councillor Kelley.

Communications and Reports from City Officers #3. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting the proposed contract between the City of Cambridge and Richard C. Rossi as the next City Manager for the City of Cambridge. [original PDF]

The contract offers a very generous salary for each of the next 3 years, but it’s also interesting in that part of the deal is that Rich Rossi gives up an enormous amount of accrued value in compensatory time and sick leave gathered over his decades of service. The City gets a good deal in the short term, and Mr. Rossi potentially gains in the very long term due to an enhanced pension. Read the contract and draw your own conclusions. I’m sure we’ll hear public comment from the usual suspects. The communication from Councillor Maher to Councillor Kelley is delightful.

Unfinished Business #10. A communication was received from Paula Crane, Administrative Assistant, Office of the City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor David P. Maher, Chair of the Ordinance Committee, for a public meeting held on Jan 30, 2013 to continue discussions on a zoning petition filed by Zevart M. Hollisian, Trustee of Garabed B. Hollisian Trust and L-Z Realty Trust and Seth D. Alexander, President, MIT Investment Management Company to amend the zoning Ordinance and Map by extending the Cambridgeport Revitalization Development District from Green Street out to Massachusetts Avenue in the area adjacent to Blanche Street; said petition includes a map and a commitment letter. The question comes on passing to be ordained on or after Feb 25, 2013. Planning Board hearing held Jan 8, 2013. Petition expires Apr 17, 2013.

Manager’s Agenda #13. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Council Order No. 14, dated 2/11/13 regarding the Forest City Petition and letter of commitment to ensure that it is consistent with other letters of commitment, and Council Order No. 15 dated 2/11/13 regarding whether the Forest City Petition would be considered spot zoning. [Legal opinion from Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor]

Communications and Reports from City Officers #4. A communication was received from Councillor David P. Maher transmitting a proposed amendment to the Forest City Zoning Petition and the Letter of Commitment as revised by Forest City to be accepted and incorporated into and made part of the Zoning Ordinance.

This is the Forest City petition and it could come to a final vote at this meeting. It’s been before the City Council in one form or another for about two years now, so please laugh out loud when anyone says that they need more time to study the issue. The votes of most of the city councillors have not changed since early in the process. It’s always been a matter of whether one or two councillors would value the overall public benefit of this petition over their need to cater to a few influential political supporters. The future debate over the potential for new housing development in and around Central Square is yet to come, and it will be a relief if we can allow the redevelopment of that long-neglected stretch of Mass. Ave. to proceed so that we can move on to the more important stuff.

Don’t be surprised if public comment turns into a circus with fear-mongering, accusations of corruption, and speeches by aspiring Council candidates all fighting over the same pool of a thousand votes.

Elsewhere on the City Manager’s Agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-65, regarding a report on Sunday openings at the Library.

The bottom line is that even if everyone would love expanded Sunday Library hours, you still need workers to staff the place and that’s not necessarily a sure thing.

Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 12-90, regarding a report on Executive Session to discuss lawsuits.

I’m not sure which lawsuits this refers to, but there will always be some people who want to milk Mother Cambridge.

Manager’s Agenda #15. Transmitting communication from Robert W. Healy, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining the rare distinction of being one of 37 municipalities in the United States with three AAA ratings from the nation’s three major credit rating agencies.

We get a similar report every year around this time. Though it may seem routine, it really is something worth celebrating. I wonder how many of the aspiring Council candidates actually understand its significance.

Resolution #14. Happy 90th Birthday wishes to Mayor Emeritus Walter J. Sullivan.   Councillor Toomey, Councillor Maher

Happy birthday, Walter. You were the first person I ever met at the Count at the old Longfellow School about 30 or so years ago. I don’t know whether I should thank you or blame you for encouraging my interest in the Cambridge elections.

Resolution #15. Congratulations to Saul Tannenbaum on launching a daily compilation of local news in and out of Cambridge titled Cambridge Happenings.   Councillor Cheung

Though Cambridge Happenings is what they call a news aggregator (as opposed to a content provider), our good pal Saul is a pretty damn good content provider as well. Check out Saul’s CCTV site for a sample.

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission and Information Technology Department on the feasibility of passing an ordinance that requires landlords to provide new tenants with a voter registration form when they move into a property in the City of Cambridge.   Councillor Cheung

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission and Information Technology Department on the feasibility of providing a service in which residents are able to look up their voter registration status online.   Councillor Cheung

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Election Commission regarding the feasibility of including voter registration forms in the annual census mailings.   Councillor Cheung

These are highlighted because of all the recent interest in elections – not just this year’s municipal election but the game of musical chairs that has been set off by the exit of Senator John Kerry to become Secretary of State. Because Massachusetts is effectively a one party state with the custom of Democrats not challenging incumbent fellow Democrats, it becomes a cascading free-for-all whenever a vacancy occurs. I have no idea whether Markey or Lynch will get the party blessing to become Senator, but if and when one of them is elevated another vacancy for a U.S. Congress seat will then occur. That’s when things could get very interesting. Will one of our State Reps. or State Senators go for the seat? Yes. Maybe one of our city councillors? If a State Rep. or State Senate seat opens up, perhaps a city councillor will go for it (and maybe create a City Council vacancy). In Massachusetts, we get a cascade of vacancies and special elections instead of actual contested elections like you might have in a two-party state. It’s a sad state of affairs.

Order #9. That the City Council schedule a roundtable/working meeting for Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:30pm in the Sullivan Chamber to discuss the Central Square Advisory Committee Report.   Mayor Davis

It’s about time. Remember that the Central Square Advisory Committee Report is ultimately just a collection of good ideas and suggestions. The Community Development Department is now drafting actual proposed zoning language that should enter the public arena sometime this summer.

Order #12. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to instruct the City Solicitor and the appropriate city staff to evaluate the feasibility of revising the PTDM ordinance to include Parking and Transportation Demand Management Plans for "residential developments."   Councillor vanBeuzekom

I’m not really sure what Councillor vanBeuzekom is looking for here. Housing development generally has a relatively low impact on vehicle trips compared to most commercial development. I suspect this may be part of the budding anti-housing movement currently being pushed by people who paradoxically call themselves housing activists.

Committee Report #2. A communication was received from Donna P. Lopez, Interim City Clerk, transmitting a report from Councillor Leland Cheung, Chair of the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee, for a public hearing held on Feb 14, 2013 to conduct a follow-up meeting on the development in Kendall Square.

This was an incredibly interesting meeting held in the Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) in Kendall Square. I have to confess that it was my first visit to the CIC. When you arrive you enter your name into a computer and are issued a printed name tag that has a number corresponding to how many times you’ve been there. I had a #1 on my badge, but it looked especially appropriate to see the badge of current Council candidate Tom Stohlman #1. I believe Leland Cheung had a #37 next to his name – not so good in a municipal election year.

It was fascinating to see the beehive of activity in the CIC – almost like a flea market of entrepreneurs busy as can be in chaotic productivity. I may just have to go back there one of these days. – Robert Winters

February 22, 2013

Proposed City Manager Contract between City of Cambridge and Richard C. Rossi

Filed under: Cambridge government,City Council — Tags: , , — Robert Winters @ 1:38 am

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE
AND
RICHARD C. ROSSI
February 2013

THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ("this Agreement"), pursuant to Chapter 41, Section 108N of the Massachusetts General Laws, is made this __ day of February, 2013, by and between the CITY OF CAMBRIDGE (the "City"), acting by and through its City Council, with a principal place of business at 795 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, and RlCHARD C. ROSSI (hereinafter referred to as "Mr. Rossi" or the "City Manager"). This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements between the City and Mr. Rossi, except as otherwise provided herein, and except for Appendix A and the Deputy City Manager’s contract expiring on July 1, 2013.

WHEREAS, Mr. Rossi has been the Deputy City Manager for the City since August, 1982; and

WHEREAS during Mr. Rossi’s tenure as the Deputy City Manager, Mr. Rossi has performed the duties of the City Manager in the City Manager’s absence;

WHEREAS, the City wishes to employ Mr. Rossi as the City Manager effective July 1, 2013;

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in this Agreement and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1 – EMPLOYMENT OF MR. ROSSI

1.1   The City, pursuant to applicable provisions of the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 41, Section 108N, and the City Charter, hereby employs Mr. Rossi as the City Manager for the City effective July 1, 2013 and Mr. Rossi hereby accepts such employment under the terms and conditions in this Agreement and the City Charter.

1.2   Mr. Rossi agrees to continue his employment with the City as the Deputy City Manager through June 30, 2013, which is the subject of a separate agreement, as amended, between Mr. Rossi and the City. Mr. Rossi and the City agree that there shall be no break in his service as the Deputy City Manager and his employment as the City Manager.

1.3   Mr. Rossi shall devote his full working time to his duties as the City Manager and shall not engage in any business activity during the terms of this Agreement except with the advance written consent of the City Council.

SECTION 2 – SERVICES

2.1   Mr. Rossi will exercise the full authority and perform all the functions, duties and responsibilities of the City Manager as specified in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 43, Sections 93 through 108 inclusive and shall perform other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the City Council may from time to time assign to him. The City acknowledges him as the Chief Executive of the City government.

2.2   The City Council may, from time to time and in consultation with Mr. Rossi, establish policies, subject to the City Charter, and the City Manager shall carry out those legislative policies in accordance with the City Charter. The failure by the City Council to establish any specific policies shall in no way and to no extent relieve Mr. Rossi from any of his obligations pursuant to Section 2.1, above.

2.3   The City Council shall review and evaluate the performance of the City Manager at meetings scheduled by the Government Operations Committee of the City Council. Said review and evaluation shall be done in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A, Sections 18-25 ("the Open Meeting Law").

SECTION 3 – TERM

3.1   Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere with the right of the City Council to terminate the services of Mr. Rossi and this Agreement at any time subject to the provisions of Section 5 of this Agreement.

3.2   Subject to the provisions of this Agreement, Mr. Rossi shall be employed as the City Manager for the City commencing July 1, 2013 and ending on June 30, 2016.

3.3   Mr. Rossi shall undertake his duties promptly upon the commencement of this Agreement and shall diligently and faithfully perform those duties in a professional manner.

3.4   If the City intends to continue Mr. Rossi’s employment beyond June 30, 2016, it shall give written notice to Mr. Rossi on or before March 1, 2016, and initiate negotiations for a successor employment contract, which contract, if agreed to, shall become effective July 1, 2016. Absent agreement on a successor employment contract, this Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2016.

SECTION 4 – COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS

4.1   Mr. Rossi has separately and voluntarily agreed to amend his Deputy City Manager Employment Agreement to remove the sick leave and compensatory time buy back provisions in Section 3, Paragraph A of such Deputy City Manager Employment Agreement, thereby extinguishing the contractual buyout provision for compensatory time and the contractual buyout provision for sick leave accrued during the course of his employment with the City, the total of which is estimated to have a current value of approximately $615,000.00 under his contract as Deputy City Manager. The City Council recognizes the unique and invaluable experience and familiarity with the City’s operations and needs that Mr. Rossi has acquired in his more than 40 years of employment with the City, including his 31 years of service as the Deputy City Manager. The City Council further recognizes the value to Mr. Rossi of the compensatory time and sick leave buyout provisions in Mr. Rossi’s Deputy City Manager Employment Agreement and has considered the extinguishment of such compensatory time and sick leave buyout in setting the salary for Mr. Rossi as City Manager. As compensation in full for the services Mr. Rossi is to perform as City Manager for the City, subject to this Agreement and Appendix A, Mr. Rossi’s annual salary shall be three hundred thirty thousand dollars ($330,000.00) per contract year. For purposes of this agreement, each contract year shall commence on July 1st and end the following June 30th and for the term of this Agreement the contract years shall be as follows:

Contract Year Dates Salary per Contract
Contract Year 1 July 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014 $330,000.00
Contract Year 2 July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015 $330,000.00
Contract Year 3 July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 $330,000.00

In the event that Mr. Rossi serves for less than a full contract year, in accordance with this Agreement and the City Charter his salary shall be prorated for the portion of the contract year actually served. The City Manager’s salary shall be subject to withholdings and deductions in accordance with applicable federal and state laws. The City Manager’s per diem rate shall be calculated by dividing the salary for the contract year by 261.

4.2   The City Manager acknowledges that he is an exempt employee under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and Massachusetts overtime provisions, including provision providing for compensatory time in lieu of overtime pay, and that he is not entitled to any overtime pay or compensatory time pursuant to the FLSA, provisions in the Massachusetts General Laws, or provisions in City ordinances, except for compensatory time provided for under this Agreement and Appendix A.

4.3   The City Manager shall be entitled to all medical, dental, vision, hospital, life insurance, and other benefits not otherwise covered by this Agreement, including those provided in Appendix A to this Agreement, and those generally available to other non-union managerial personnel employed by the City on the same terms, conditions, and limitations as such benefits are generally available as a matter of uniform City policy to all other non-union managerial personnel employed by the City. He shall be eligible for the same holiday, personal and administrative leave benefits, and all such other benefits of employment, including but not limited to deferred compensation, flexible spending, longevity, management allowance, sick leave incentive pay, and tuition reimbursement, as are provided to other non-union management employees of the City, excluding any benefits which are provided only as a matter of individual employment contract with other employees.

4.4   The City Manager shall be entitled to twenty-five (25) working days of vacation per contract year, exclusive of legal holidays. Such vacation shall be awarded at the beginning of each calendar year, as is the practice with other managerial employees. Subject to the second paragraph of this Section, the City Manager may carry over up to and including five (5) days of accrued unused vacation time from one contract year to the subsequent contract year, but in no event shall the City Manager carry forward more than five days of vacation in any one contract year.

The parties agree that Mr. Rossi has accrued unused vacation days on June 30, 2013 from his service as the Deputy City Manager, the amount of which shall be determined as of June 30, 2013. The parties agree that Mr. Rossi will be entitled to carry over no more than fifteen (15) days of such accrued, unused vacation time and that he shall be eligible to buy back all such accrued, unused vacation days earned as Deputy City Manager at the time of his retirement or termination or in accordance with this Section. The buyback of the total of such accrued, unused days, minus the fifteen (15) carried-over days, shall be at his rate of pay as Deputy City Manager. Mr. Rossi may also exercise the option to buy back all or a portion of the balance of such accrued Deputy City Manager vacation at any time during each of the three years of this Agreement. The total accrued, unused vacation days which are subject to this buyback shall be determined as of June 30, 2013.

The parties further agree that at the time of his retirement or termination, Mr. Rossi shall be eligible to buy back, at his then existing rate of pay, all his accumulated vacation, personal, compensatory and administrative leave that remained unused at the time of retirement or termination and that was earned by him in the position of City Manager, and any remainder of the fifteen (15) days carried over from his service as Deputy City Manager.

4.5   The City Manager shall be entitled to fifteen (15) days sick leave awarded at the beginning of each calendar year, as is the practice with other non union managerial employees. Sick leave shall accumulate unlimited, year to year. The parties agree that Mr. Rossi has accrued substantial unused sick leave from his many years of employment with the City and such accrued, unused sick leave shall be carried over upon the commencement of this Agreement on July 1, 2013. Any sick leave buyback upon the termination of this Agreement shall be limited to the cap established by the City for other non-union management employees at the time of such termination.

4.6   The parties recognize that Mr. Rossi received certain benefits during his employment as the Deputy City Manager and that while such benefits would not be available to other individuals who may some day serve as the City Manager, the City Council agrees that the continuation of such benefits for Mr. Rossi is, in part, an inducement to Mr. Rossi to accept employment as the City Manager for the City and waive certain sick leave benefits. Therefore, the benefits provided for in Appendix A, attached to this Agreement, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement by reference.

SECTION 5 – REMOVAL AND TERMINATION; SUSPENSION

5.1   Mr. Rossi may terminate this Agreement and his employment with the City at any time by giving the Mayor and City Council written notice at least 4 (four) months prior to the effective date of termination. With the exception of payment for accrued unused vacation, sick leave buyback as provided in paragraph 4.5 above, and other benefits, as provided in paragraphs 4.3 and 4.4 above, as well as the compensatory time and supplemental retirement benefits provided in Appendix A of this agreement and other accrued benefits as are due to Mr. Rossi under the terms of this Agreement, including Appendix A, Mr. Rossi shall not be entitled to receive any other compensation or benefits after the date of termination under this Section 5.1.

5.2   Mr. Rossi may be suspended and/or removed as the City Manager, and this Agreement terminated, for "Cause" by a majority vote of the City Council. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "Cause" shall mean conviction of a felony; serious conduct unbecoming a City Manager; repeated inefficiency or incompetency in the performance of his duties as City Manager, provided that the City Council has given written notice to Mr. Rossi of such inefficiency or incompetency and thirty (30) days to cure; and incapacity, subject to the ADA. With the exception of payment for accrued unused vacation, sick leave buyback as provided in paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 above, and other benefits, as provided in paragraph 4.3 above, as well as the compensatory time and supplemental retirement benefits provided in Appendix A of this agreement, and other accrued benefits as are due to Mr. Rossi under the terms of this Agreement, including Appendix A, Mr. Rossi shall not be entitled to receive any other compensation or benefits after the date of termination under this Section 5.2.

5.3   Mr. Rossi may be removed as City Manager, and this Agreement terminated at any time for any reason by majority vote of the City Council. If such termination is not for "Cause" pursuant to Section 5.2 of this Agreement, and Mr. Rossi is willing and able to perform his duties under this Agreement, in addition to the other payments specified in Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and Appendix A of this Agreement, the City shall pay him an early termination payment in a lump sum minus withholdings required by law or authorized by Mr. Rossi, as follows: if such early termination occurs within the first Contract Year, in the gross amount of twelve (12) months of salary at the annual rate specified in Section 4.1, above; if such early termination occurs within the second Contract Year, in the gross amount of nine (9) months of salary at the annual rate specified in Section 4.1, above; if such early termination occurs within the third Contract Year, the gross amount of six (6) months of salary at the annual rate specified in Section 4.1, above.

SECTION 6 – INDEMNIFICATION

6.1   To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City shall (1) defend, save harmless and indemnify the City Manager against any tort, professional liability, claim or demand, or other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of his duties as City Manager, even if said claim has been made following his termination from employment, provided that the City Manager acted within the scope of his duties, and (2) shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. The City may compromise and settle any such claim or suit and will pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon without recourse to the City Manager.

The City shall reimburse the City Manager for any attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the City Manager in connection with such claims or suits involving the City Manager in his professional capacity.

This indemnification shall also apply to the City Manager after he leaves the employment of the City.

Indemnification of Mr. Rossi shall not apply to any proceeding to terminate his employment as the City Manager pursuant to statute, this Agreement or otherwise. Mr. Rossi agrees to cooperate fully with the City and the City’s attorney in any claim, suit, or matter in which the City is indemnifying Mr. Rossi. Mr. Rossi shall be paid the existing daily rate for his position at the time of his retirement or other end of his service for time spent for testimony or consultation by or on behalf of the City in defense of such claims or actions. This Section 6.1 also applies with respect to claims, suits, or matters which arise out of Mr. Rossi’s performance of his duties as Deputy City Manager.

The City agrees to review purchasing "Directors and Officers" liability insurance from an outside insurance company for the City Manager as to coverage and cost. If the City Manager and the City Council agree on the purchase of such insurance after the City’s review, the City shall purchase such coverage at the City’s expense for the City Manager.

This Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

SECTION 7 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

7.1   This Agreement and Appendix A, attached, constitutes the entire agreement between the City and Mr. Rossi regarding the subject matter hereof and may be changed (amended, modified, or terms waived) only if mutually agreed to by the parties and set forth in a writing approved by majority vote of the City Council and signed by the Mayor and by Mr. Rossi, subject to the City Charter.

7.2   Any notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be directed to Mr. Rossi at his residence as identified in the City’s personnel records for Mr. Rossi and made by in-hand delivery or by certified mail, return receipt requested. Any such notices shall be directed to the City and made by certified mail return receipt requested to the office of
the Mayor.

7.3   This Agreement is governed by and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the City Charter.

7.4   Unless the parties expressly agree in writing to extend or renew the employment relationship between the City and Mr. Rossi subject to the City Charter, such employment relationship between the City and Mr. Rossi shall terminate on June 30, 2016.

7.5   If any portion or provision of this Agreement is held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement will be considered severable, will not be affected, and will remain in full force and effect. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against either party.

7.6   Subject to this Agreement, and Appendix A, all other general provisions of the City’s ordinances, rules or policies relating to uniwriform benefits for non-union management employees shall also apply to the City Manager in addition to the benefits enumerated herein for the City Manager.

 

In witness whereof, the City Council of the City of Cambridge has voted that this agreement be entered into as duly attested by its City Clerk and Mr. Rossi has signed and executes this Agreement this __ day of 2013.

CITY MANAGER

 _____________________________
Richard C. Rossi

_____________________________
City Clerk

_____________________________
Approved as to Legal Form
City Solicitor

CITY OF CAMBRIDGE

_____________________________
Mayor Henrietta Davis

_____________________________
Vice Mayor E. Denise Simmons

_____________________________
Councillor Leland Cheung

_____________________________
Councillor Marjorie C. Decker

_____________________________
Councillor Craig A. Kelley

_____________________________
Councillor David P. Maher

_____________________________
Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves

_____________________________
Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Jr.

_____________________________
Councillor Minka vanBeuzekom
 

APPENDIX A
TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE
AND
RICHARD C. ROSSI, City Manager
February 2013

This Appendix A supplements the Employment Agreement between the City of Cambridge ("City") and Richard C. Rossi ("Mr. Rossi" or "City Manager") and is an integral part of that Employment Agreement, fully enforceable under the laws of the Commonwealth.

Whereas Mr. Rossi had certain benefits in his employment agreement as the Deputy City Manager and has certain benefits under his Employment Agreement; and

Whereas the City wishes to continue such benefits as an inducement for Mr. Rossi to enter into an employment agreement with the City to serve as the City’s City Manager;

Now Therefore, the City and Mr. Rossi agree to the following:

A.   Transportation. The City Manager shall be provided with the use of a City owned or leased automobile for the City Manager’s unrestricted use. Insurance, maintenance and repairs and gasoline in connection with the operation of said automobile shall be paid by the City. Upon termination of this Agreement and the City Manager’s employment with the City, he shall return the automobile to the City.

B.   Cellular Phone. The City Manager will be provided with a cellular phone, tablet, and other devices to be used in accordance with his duties for the City. It is understood that some moderate personal use will be permitted in recognition of the City Manager’s work schedule.

C.   Vacation and Compensatory Time. The City Manager acknowledges that he is frequently required or called upon to perform work outside of the normal office hours of the City and he commits to performing such work. The City Council recognizes that the City Manager’s hours require that he devote a great deal of time outside of the normal office hours of the City and the City shall permit the City Manager to earn and take up to three weeks of non-FLSA compensatory time off per year. One week of earned but unused compensatory time may be carried over from one Contract Year to the subsequent Contract Year, on a cumulative basis. Mr. Rossi shall be eligible to buy back up to three weeks of unused vacation time, earned as City Manager at his then existing rate, on an annual basis. If he elects to buy back such vacation time he shall not be eligible to carry over any of the vacation time awarded for that year into the next calendar year.

This provision is without prejudice to the vacation time owed to the City Manager from his Deputy City Manager’s contract.

This provision survives the termination of this Agreement.

D.   Life Insurance. The City Manager shall be covered by an insurance policy in the amount of $120,000 payable to the beneficiary/beneficiaries named by the City Manager. This insurance may include "whole life", "paid up" or "cash value" insurance at the discretion of the City Manager.

E.   Retirement. The City agrees that upon retirement, the City Manager shall be paid, in addition to any retirement benefits that he would be entitled to pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Massachusetts General Laws, further supplemental retirement benefits pursuant to MGL Chapter 41, Section 108N. It is the intention of the City Manager, upon retirement, to select Option C as specified in MGL Chapter 32 Section 12, in order to provide a survivor benefit. The City agrees, pursuant to MGL Chapter 41, Section 108N to supplement the City Manager’s retirement benefit by paying to him a monthly payment equal to the difference between his actual monthly retirement allowance, under Option C, and the allowance he would receive had he selected Option A as specified in MGL Chapter 32 Section 12. These monthly payments shall begin with the date of his retirement and shall terminate with his death. These monthly supplemental benefit payments shall be payable from the non-contributory retirement account. If, for any reason, this is determined to be unenforceable, there shall be an affirmative duty on the part of the City to make such supplemental payments from the Employee Benefits Account or other appropriate account. It is understood and agreed that this contractual right to these supplemental retirement benefits is vested with the City Manager in the same manner and extent that his other pension rights are vested pursuant to Chapter 32, sections one to twenty-eight inclusive, of the Massachusetts General Laws, including as provided in Section 10 thereof. It is the intent of this Agreement that these supplemental pension rights vest with the City Manager immediately upon execution of this Agreement. This provision (Section E) shall survive the termination of this Agreement and his employment as City Manager.

The parties acknowledge that upon the effective date of the Agreement between Mr. Rossi and the City for Mr. Rossi to be employed as the City Manager for the City, Mr. Rossi’s employment contract as the Deputy City Manager, including Section 9 therein, shall be tenninated (without any consequences of termination as may be provided in that contract) and superseded by this Agreement on July 1, 2013, but without prejudice to his vacation leave as provided in this Agreement or Appendix A. The supplemental retirement benefits previously provided to Mr. Rossi under that Section shall be provided under the above Section E of this Appendix and not Section 9 of the Employment Agreement between the City of Cambridge and the Deputy City Manager.

 

In witness whereof, the City Council of the City of Cambridge has voted that this Appendix to the Employment Agreement between the City and Mr. Rossi be entered into as duly attested by its City Clerk and Mr. Rossi has signed and executes this Appendix A to this Agreement this __ day of February, 2013.

CITY MANAGER

 _____________________________
Richard C. Rossi

_____________________________
City Clerk

_____________________________
Approved as to Legal Form
City Solicitor

CITY OF CAMBRIDGE

_____________________________
Mayor Henrietta Davis

_____________________________
Vice Mayor E. Denise Simmons

_____________________________
Councillor Leland Cheung

_____________________________
Councillor Marjorie C. Decker

_____________________________
Councillor Craig A. Kelley

_____________________________
Councillor David P. Maher

_____________________________
Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves

_____________________________
Councillor Timothy J. Toomey, Jr.

_____________________________
Councillor Minka vanBeuzekom
 
« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress