Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 22, 2024

Out Like A Lion – March 25, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 12:27 pm

Out Like A Lion – March 25, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

These are a few of my favorite things….City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $15,000 to the Grant Fund Public Celebrations (Arts Council) Other Ordinary Maintenance account. The MCC Cultural District Grant provides financial support to state-designated Cultural Districts throughout the Commonwealth.
Order Adopted 9-0

I will simply highlight the last paragraph: “Cambridge’s Central Square Cultural District was one of the 10 inaugural MA Cultural Districts designated by the Legislature in 2012. This funding will support District-based initiatives that drive economic growth and strengthen the distinctive character of the Central Square Cultural District.”

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Parking Study Executive Summary. [text of report]
pulled by Pickett; comments by Pickett, Nolan, McGovern, Toner (on available parking alternatives), Wilson, Siddiqui, Azeem (wants large grocery stores to be replaced by bodegas – based on notion that the City builds these, wants greater prioritization of bus transportation, wants more subsidized e-bikes), Simmons; comments by Iram Farooq on survey sampling, Yi-An Huang; referred to Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0

As near as I can tell, this “study” consists primarily of survey responses and policy proposals from City staff. I’m not really sure how this qualifies as a “study”. Absent are such seemingly important data as how many on-street parking spaces have been lost and how many more are anticipated to be lost due to current policies (such as the Cycling Safety Ordinance). This seems like a deficiency that ought to be corrected in something billed as a “Parking Study”.

Manager’s Agenda #10. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following persons as members of the Central Square Advisory Committee for a term of three years; Melissa Greene and Kevin Grinberg.
Appointments Approved 9-0

Welcome aboard, Kevin. It’s also great to see Melissa continuing her role on the Central Square Advisory Committee.

Manager’s Agenda #11. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order Number 24-09, regarding a report back with any necessary edits to zoning language that would allow unrelated people to live together in the City of Cambridge. [text of report]
pulled by Siddiqui; Rules Suspended to bring forward Housing Committee Report; Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 9-0; Communication Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #12. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number #24-03, regarding a response on potential public renewable energy projects that could receive funding through the IRA Direct Pay provision. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by Ellen Katz (DPW), Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan, Susanne Rasmussen (CDD); comments by Nolan; Rasmussen states that Housing Division (CDD) soon to become separate Housing Department; Pickett on 60% subsidy via Direct Pay; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-10, regarding the data analysis included in the Economic Feasibility Analysis provided to EOHLC as part of Cambridge’s MBTA Communities final compliance submission. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Iram Farooq, Jeff Roberts (CDD); Nolan notes that the report shows “asking rent” in tables, but actual median rents are significantly lower; Azeem disputes this claiming that median rents are lower only because they include all subsidized rents [actual truth is somewhere in between]; Placed on File 9-0

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department and Community Development Department to study whether the City Council could add maximum lot area per dwelling unit, maximum setback requirements, and minimum floor area ratios in some districts or as part of an overlay in the Zoning Ordinance and whether the City Council could require a special permit for a down conversion in developments that would result in a net loss of housing units. [Charter Right – Pickett, Mar 18, 2024]
Councillor Pickett moves to take up both Charter Right #1 and #2; Farooq says she and staff have been consulting Housing Committee Chairs re: their priorities, feels that more study needed to see how expansive this phenomenon actually is; Toner does not object to “down conversions”; Sobrinho-Wheeler OK with restricting “down conversions” claiming this would not be a ban; McGovern prefers to get legal opinion reported directly to Housing Committee; Pickett wants more information about how common this is; Azeem wants income-restricted housing required with any multi-family housing [which likely would result in only subsidized housing developers doing projects]; JSW emphasizes part of Order about setbacks; JSW amendment to refer to Housing Committee Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 7-2 (Pickett, Toner – No)

I’ll simply repeat what I said last week: I am very leery of this proposal – especially if it is interpreted to apply to existing buildings. During the days of rent control, the requirement that a “removal permit” was required prior to joining units was routinely used to prevent property owners from doing very reasonable things. For example, when I bought my triple-decker, the apartment where I now live had been operated as a rooming house, and the City treated it as 5 housing units. I had to use my tenure dating back to 1978 in the building to be allowed to legally restore the floor back to the apartment it had been for over fifty years. Had I not been able to do this, it would not have been possible for me to continue owning or living in the building. Many years later, I now occasionally consider the possibility of occupying two floors of the building, and I would be outraged if our elected officials took away my flexibility to do that. The devil, as is often said, is in the details. There is a very creepy mindset in the minds of some elected officials that personal freedom should always take a back seat to their political agendas.

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department to work with the chairs of the Housing Committee on zoning language that effectively promotes multi-family housing, including inclusionary units, citywide. [Charter Right – Pickett, Mar 18, 2024]
Comments by Pickett, Wilson (with amendment), Toner (will not support Wilson amendment); Sobrinho-Wheeler comments of legalities; Azeem moved to amend Wilson amendment to delete “multiple options for”; comments by Nolan re: middle-income, “workforce” housing; McGovern opposed to conversions to single-family for purpose of sale, suggests that this is only about “having conversations” now; City Manager notes need for prioritization, legal feasibility, questions how many “down conversions” are actually occurring; Toner notes many studies currently underway; Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (Toner – No)

Again, I’ll simply repeat what I said last week: While I generally agree with the idea of allowing multi-family housing citywide, I really don’t think that this Order should be quoting a class project by a Harvard freshman in making assertions (some of which are demonstrably false) regarding the history of zoning in Cambridge.

On The Table #3. Policy Order to Edit City Council Rule 21A, 21B and add 21C Requiring Two City Councilors to Sponsor Policy Orders and Resolutions to be Filed and Placed on Council Agenda. [Tabled – Mar 18, 2024]
Taken from Table 9-0; Order #1 taken up as well; Toner comments (in response to idiotic and profane testimony of Robert Bledsoe during Public Comment); City Solicitor Megan Bayer notes legal gray area regarding whether profanity may be prohibited – noting that it is not entirely affected by First Amendment, notes history of Mass. Declaration of Rights, John and Samuel Adams when still under British rule, speech about government at that time could be was crude and pushed the limits and that’s the basis of our government today, a future court could say that profanity could be prohibited, essential phrase is “fighting words”, use of profanity directed at an individual could be interpreted as “fighting words”, use of the “F word” in excitement might not be, difficult to make decision in the moment; Toner notes list of potential infractions; Toner proposes to remove prohibition of profanity (though he will vote against removing it); McGovern suggests that this discussion will lead to some people pushing the envelope re: what they can get away with [note: McGovern and others felt no concerns about slander as recently as several months ago]; JSW, Azeem OK with removing prohibition of profanity; Nolan suggests amending to distinguish “requests” and “prohibitions”; Bayer provides additional guidance on “loud and repetitive”; Simmons’ wise comments on “fighting words” and being welcoming, chilling effect of some words and actions, importance of “the rule of the Chair” in conduct of meetings; Placed on File 9-0

On The Table #4. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public hearing on Feb 15, 2024, which was recessed, and reconvened on Feb 26, 2024. The Call of the meeting was to review and discuss possible amendments to the City Council Rules. At the meeting on Feb 26, 2024, the Committee voted to send 46 rule changes to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. Please see orders within the report. [Tabled – Mar 18, 2024] [text of report]
Taken from Table 9-0; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Order #1. City Council Rule Changes.   Councillor Toner
Taken up with On The Table #3; comments by multiple councillors; Councillor Nolan, in particular, notes her intention to allow back-and-forth interaction with public in committee meetings when appropriate (thank you); All Rules Adopted as Amended 9-0

I have no particular issues with the proposed rules changes, but I do find curious the level of vitriol expressed by some people about some of the changes pertaining to Public Comment. In my view, Public Comment has largely devolved into performance by the season ticket holders with the occasional flood of “talking point zombies” generated by organized groups and facilitated by Zoom. My only suggestions are: (a) the Mayor and committee Chairs should have broad discretion in managing public comment and not be bound by overly rigid rules, (b) back-and-forth dialogue between councillors and the public should be encouraged at committee meetings whenever it is helpful, and (c) steps should be taken proactively to address the potential of extraordinary numbers of nonresidents signing up for public comment as part of organized campaigns on controversial issues.

Applications & Petitions #1. A Zoning Petition Has been received from Khalida Griffin-Sheperd et al. regarding Affordable Housing Trust Zoning. (AP24#10) [text of petition]
Referred to Ordinance Committee & Planning Board 9-0

One look at the signers of this petition was enough to convince me that it should be rejected. I also find it curious that the petitioners want to be overly prescriptive in who may serve on their proposed expanded Affordable Housing Trust (AHT). Also, though the idea of using AHT funds to provide rent subsidies seems like a possible alternative to the construction of some of the extraordinarily expensive deed-restricted housing now being funded through the AHT, this proposal seems to simply want to add on this new very high cost for rent vouchers – a potential budget-buster at a time when the City Council really needs to be controlling the Budget much more than they have in recent years. Considering the fact that the AHT is now partially funded out of the City’s Operating Budget, this also raises the question of the legality of such direct rent payments under the Anti-Aid Amendment to the Mass. Constitution.

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department, the Community Development Department, and the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department to determine whether the City could provide incentives for residents who do not have cars.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler to add Nolan as sponsor; JSW comments on incentives to not own car, some concerns about whether this may violate Anti-Aid Amendment; Toner questions why there is a need to incentivize those who have already decided to not own a car, whether BlueBikes subsidies might be in perpetuity; Pickett questions why this is actually an incentive in that it rewards who have already made choice to not own a car [that is, whether this is just a patronage program for a subset of the population]; Nolan says this is not meant to be just for those who don’t currently own a car; Wilson questions need for incentives for those already w/o car and whether this might penalize or shame those who actually need a car]; Siddiqui says intent is not to shame anyone; Azeem quotes an academic paper claiming that every family contributes $14,000 per year to subsidize car ownership, says transit gets better the more people use it [yeah, right], wants to subsidize transit, e-bikes; Simmons asks if the proposes incentive would apply to those who don’t have cars or those who might get cars; JSW says it’s for both, says this is not about shaming; McGovern suggests amending language; Simmons comments on large families, unreliable MBTA, those who work outside Cambridge, those who shop elsewhere, churchgoers, elderly and those with mobility issues – will vote Present; Amendment to add Nolan Adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 5-3-0-1 (BA,MM,PN,SS,JSW – Yes; JP,PT,AW – No; DS – Present)

There seems to be this belief among some councillors (and some City staff) that the only reason people make personal choices (such as whether or not to own a car) are primarily based on government intervention. I disagree.

Order #5. Support of the Regional Heat Pump Accelerator Program.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Order Adopted 9-0

I will repeat my point of view from last year when BEUDO (or is it BEUDERO?) amendments were being discussed and ordained. Simply dictating mandates is not nearly as effective (or fair) as providing financial incentives. – Robert Winters

March 14, 2024

Springing Forward – March 18, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 5:23 pm

Springing Forward – March 18, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here are the things I found interesting this week:First Sign of Spring

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the City of Cambridge retaining its AAA rating from the nation’s three major credit rating agencies. (CM24#42) [text of reports]
pulled by Pickett; comments by Pickett, Claire Spinner, Toner on OPEB, Michele Kincaid, Taha Jennings, McGovern, Nolan, Yi-An Huang, JSW [24 triple AAA cities in USA], Azeem, Simmons (notes what happens when ARPA funds no longer available); Placed on File 9-0

This is almost routine at this point. I can’t even remember when we last failed to get a “triple triple”. One thing that struck me in the Moody’s report was: “Cambridge’s assessed value projected to decline by 2% in 2025 before recovering in 2026.” I don’t believe there’s any way that residential assessed values could be falling, so any drop is likely due to lower commercial assessed values. There’s also this: “The city’s assessed value is projected to flatten over the next couple years including a 2% decline in total assessed value that is projected in 2025. The decline in total AV is driven by a projected 7% decline in commercial value in 2025 and projected 2% decline in 2026. The declines are driven primarily by the challenges in the commercial office space sub-sector as a result of work-from-home options that have taken hold in many companies and industries in the city and across the nation. The residential sector is projected to see no change in 2025 values followed by a projected 2% increase annually beginning in 2026 through 2028.” The S&P report has this cautionary note: “We could lower the rating if reserves were to decrease significantly without a plan for restoration or if debt service and retirement costs were to pressure the city’s finances.”

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to recommendations for the block rates for water consumption and sewer use for the period beginning April 1, 2024 and ending March 31, 2025. (CM24#43) [text of report]
pulled by Pickett; comments by Pickett on use of ARPA funds for new filter media at Fresh Pond, Owen O’Riordan notes ARPA will again be used next year to keep water rates from rising even more, need for upgrades on our (relatively young) 25-year-old treatment plant, cost of water main replacements; Mark Gallagher (Acting Managing Direct, Water Department) notes increases in labor costs and supply chain cost increases; Pickett asks if any ARPA funds available to be reallocated to these purposes, O’Riordan responds affirmatively; Nolan on PFAS, effects of minerals in water on plumbing fixtures; O’Riordan notes long-term strategy on chlorides, Gallagher concurs re: chlorides, hardness; Toner on problems with plumbing fixtures and remediation, Gallagher reminds that HW heaters should be drained once/year; Order Adopted 9-0

The notable increases in the water rate last year and this year actually exceed the increases in the sewer rate, but it has generally been the reverse for some time. It costs far more to lose water than to supply it.

water-sewer rates FY25

*All rates are per CcF. CcF is an abbreviation of 100 cubic feet. One CcF is approximately 750 gallons

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments and meet with the MBTA and City of Boston in advance of the July Red Line shutdown about the implementation of a fare-free 1 bus program.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; uptalking comments by JSW, Siddiqui (notes meet w/JSW and her w/Livable Streets), Toner, Azeem; Order Adopted 9-0

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department and Community Development Department to study whether the City Council could add maximum lot area per dwelling unit, maximum setback requirements, and minimum floor area ratios in some districts or as part of an overlay in the Zoning Ordinance and whether the City Council could require a special permit for a down conversion in developments that would result in a net loss of housing units.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Wilson, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Pickett; comments by JSW, Nolan, Pickett; Charter Right – Pickett

I am very leery of this proposal – especially if it is interpreted to apply to existing buildings. During the days of rent control, the requirement that a “removal permit” was required prior to joining units was routinely used to prevent property owners from doing very reasonable things. For example, when I bought my triple-decker, the apartment where I now live had been operated as a rooming house, and the City treated it as 5 housing units. I had to use my tenure dating back to 1978 in the building to be allowed to legally restore the floor back to the apartment it had been for over fifty years. Had I not been able to do this, it would not have been possible for me to continue owning or living in the building. Many years later, I now occasionally consider the possibility of occupying two floors of the building, and I would be outraged if our elected officials took away my flexibility to do that. The devil, as is often said, is in the details. There is a very creepy mindset in the minds of some elected officials that personal freedom should always take a back seat to their political agendas.

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to direct the Community Development Department to work with the chairs of the Housing Committee on zoning language that effectively promotes multi-family housing, including inclusionary units, citywide.   Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Pickett; comments by Azeem, McGovern (connecting this to “Missing Middle” zoning petition), Wilson, Pickett; Charter Right – Pickett

While I generally agree with the idea of allowing multi-family housing citywide, I really don’t think that this Order should be quoting a class project by a Harvard freshman in making assertions (some of which are demonstrably false) regarding the history of zoning in Cambridge.

Order #9. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments and report back to the City Council with recommendations for adjusting parking permit fees to better align with associated costs.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Toner; comments by Nolan (suggesting doubling fee except for low-income residents, charging more for larger vehicles); Toner, Pickett object to suggestion to charge more based on vehicle size; Azeem complains about increasing size of vehicles; Simmons OK with reviewing fees, concerns about charging more for larger vehicles and effect on families who may need a larger vehicle; Nolan additional concerns about larger vehicles; Order Adopted 9-0

Once again, if this is simply a matter of adjusting fees to cover the administrative costs of the resident parking permit program, then fine. On the other hand, if the intention is to use increased fees to carry out yet another social engineering program, then I hope this goes nowhere fast.

Order #10. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to develop ways to fund support of decarbonization and clean energy projects and technical assistance for property owners of all types especially those with limited resources, with an initial focus on work associated with BEUDO emissions reduction requirements.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Pickett, Councillor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

As I have said before, if the City wants to provide incentives to change energy sources or provide greater efficiencies for homeowners, then I’m totally on board with that. I am, however, mindful of the woefully inadequate electrical infrastructure in Cambridge (look up sometime to see how many streetlights are connected to extension cords over the street to get their power) and the potential consequence of increased electrification. I also encourage everyone to read the recent March 14 New York Times article “A New Surge in Power Use Is Threatening U.S. Climate Goals”. – Robert Winters

Committee Report #1. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public hearing on Feb 15, 2024, which was recessed, and reconvened on Feb 26, 2024. The Call of the meeting was to review and discuss possible amendments to the City Council Rules. At the meeting on Feb 26, 2024, the Committee voted to send 46 rule changes to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. Please see orders within the report. [text of report]
pulled by Toner; Toner notes that there are really about 10 changes – mostly suggested by City Clerk, additional comments on codifying how much time allotted for Public Comment and other rules changes; Simmons notes that process requires this to be Laid on Table; Sobrinho-Wheeler addresses Public Comment time limits; Nolan favors longer time limits during Public Comment; McGovern wants 2 minute limit for all meetings, says Public Comment has changed over time from individuals (notes Roy Bercaw) and how it is now dominated by organized groups with many speakers having little or no knowledge of what they are speaking about, problem of same speakers every week; Azeem comments on time limits and predictability of commentary from organized groups and frequent speakers – would prefer a separate meeting just for public comment; Pickett notes value of Zoom as well as the added commitment associated with actually showing up; Wilson also notes changing nature of Public Comment; JSW clarifies that nobody is suggesting different time limits for different people, potential value of separate meeting for public comment; Toner expresses openness to future changes in Public Comment; Simmons notes that Open Meeting Law does not require public comment, and that we allow it under our rules, notes many other opportunities for offering citizen input, notes past practice of sometimes taking City Council meetings to the neighborhoods, allowance for public comment via interpreters, role of time of meeting in access; Late Policy Order from Toner calling for two sponsors for any policy order; McGovern expresses confusion of “Resolutions” vs. “Policy Orders & Resolutions” – amplified by Toner, Simmons; Toner notes that most Resolutions are non-controversial, but controversial Resolutions appear with Policy Orders; Nolan OK w/requiring two sponsors but wants to exercise Charter Right; Simmons, McGovern explain that if Charter Right exercises cannot be part of Rules Changes to be considered at next meeting; City Clerk Diane LeBlanc concurs that this is necessary under current Rules; Tabled 9-0

Late Order #11. That the City Council Rules be amended to require at least two City Councillors supporting a proposed policy order and/or resolution before filing and including as part of the City Council Agenda.   Councillor Toner
Tabled 9-0

February 27, 2024

Current City of Cambridge Board and Commission Vacancies (Feb 27, 2024)

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government — Tags: , — Robert Winters @ 4:38 am

Volunteer Opportunities – Cambridge Boards & Commissions

Cambridge LGBTQ+ Commission Members Sought

Feb 26, 2024 – Cambridge City Manager Yi-An Huang is seeking persons interested in serving on the Cambridge LGBTQ+ Commission (LGBTQ+ Commission).

The LGBTQ+ Commission was established under Chapter 2.125 of the Cambridge Municipal Code. The function of the Commission is to advocate for a culture of respect and monitor progress toward equality of all persons with regard to sexual orientation and gender identity and expression, and to promote policies and practices that have a positive effect on the health, welfare, and safety of all persons who live, visit, or work in the city with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Commissioners are expected to be knowledgeable about the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals and must live or work in Cambridge.City Seal

Commissioners are expected to:

  • Attend monthly meetings;
  • Participate and volunteer for outreach and other community events;
  • Promote the principals of anti-racism, diversity, equity, and inclusion; and
  • Work with LGBTQ+ Commission staff.

The LGBTQ+ Commission consists of up to 20 members appointed to 3-year terms.

  • Meetings are typically held on the fourth Thursday of every month, 6-8pm., though the meeting schedule may be reassessed to accommodate Commissioners’ needs.
  • Under the provisions of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, meetings are usually required to be in person at 51 Inman Street; although the LGBTQ+ Commission has shifted to meeting hybrid under the temporary Open Meeting Law provisions.
  • The LGBTQ+ Commission will continue to utilize remote capabilities whenever public health needs arise.

Board and commission members in Cambridge do not generally receive compensation for their time. However, the city has explored the possibility of offering a stipend for high time commitment boards. Serving on the LGBTQ+ Commission does not require a high time commitment and therefore is not under consideration for a potential stipend at this time.

The deadline for submitting applications is Monday, March 25, 2024. Applications can be submitted using the City of Cambridge’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/apply. A cover letter and resume, or an overview of relevant experience, can be submitted during the online application process. Paper applications can also be obtained at the City Manager’s Office at Cambridge City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue.

For more information, contact Carolina Almonte at 617-349-4396 or calmonte@cambridgema.gov.

Members Sought for City of Cambridge Danehy Park Improvements Plan Working Group

Feb 13, 2024 – Cambridge City Manager Yi-An Huang seeks volunteers to serve on a new Working Group to help guide the Danehy Park Improvements Plan Project.City Seal

Working Group members will have two general responsibilities:

  • Serve as community representatives to help guide the City Manager and staff on key issues related to the design of improvements to Danehy Park;
  • Help communicate the process and design of the project back to the larger community.

Danehy Park is 30 years old and needs a fresh look. The City of Cambridge has contracted with a landscape consultant team to plan the next 10-20 years of improvements to the park. The goal is for Danehy Park to be an exceptional public park that residents of Cambridge will continue to be proud of and cherish. The Capital Improvement Plan will identify improvements for Danehy Park that:

  • complement the essential natural, historic, and visual character of the site;
  • are based on a strong public engagement process that prioritizes outreach to traditionally underrepresented groups. In addition to the Working Group, there will be a community engagement process for additional public participation;
  • provide access to and protect the plants and animals of Danehy Park;
  • address future flooding and heat impacts due to climate change;
  • allow people of all ages, backgrounds and interests to relax, play, exercise and connect with other people in the park;
  • judge the condition and quality of the parks features and systems; and
  • propose a series of distinct projects and phased improvements to the park.

The Working Group will be made up of 10-15 members, representing a diverse set of interests. This will help ensure that multiple perspectives are heard and that there is appropriate representation reporting back to the larger community. The Working Group will include residents, institutional representatives, and a variety of people that currently use Danehy Park. It is anticipated that the group will meet six to eight times between April 2024 and December 2024. Meetings of the Working Group will be open to the public.

Individuals who want to shape the future of Danehy Park and want to collaborate with City of Cambridge staff to realize the goals above are encouraged to apply.

Persons interested in applying can do so through the City’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/apply and select “Danehy Park Improvements Working Group” in the list of Current Vacancies. A letter of interest can be submitted during the online application process.

The deadline for submitting applications is Monday, March 11, 2024.

Members Sought to fill Cambridge Library Board of Trustees Vacancy

Feb 12, 2024 – Cambridge City Manager Yi-An Huang is seeking to fill a vacancy on the Board of Trustees for the Cambridge Public Library.City Seal

Library trustees are volunteer community representatives, library advocates, and leaders in the establishment of goals and policies for the Cambridge Public Library system. Trustees are a vital link between the library staff and the community and work to ensure the quality of library services, collections, and programs, and to make certain that the library reflects and is relevant to the community.

Trustees are appointed by the City Manager following City Council confirmation to serve a 3-year term. Board members are expected to attend monthly board meetings, committee and community meetings, appropriate continuing education workshops or conferences, and library programs as their schedules allow. Monthly meetings are usually held on the first Tuesday of the month at 5pm, virtually and in-person in the Cambridge Public Library Board Room, 449 Broadway.

Ideal candidates will have an interest in and passion for public libraries and an understanding of the importance of the public library as a center of information, culture, recreation, and life-long learning in the community. Candidates should also have knowledge of the community, including an awareness of diverse social and economic conditions, needs and interests of all groups. Strong verbal and written communication skills, including public speaking skills are required. Trustees work productively as a team. It is also important for candidates to understand how the role of the public library is evolving and how information technology and societal changes inform the library’s future.

Applications can be submitted to the City Manager’s Office using the City’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/apply. A cover letter and resume or applicable experience can be submitted during the online application process. For more information about the role of Library Trustees, contact Maria McCauley, Director of Libraries at mmccauley@cambridgema.gov.

The deadline for submitting applications is Monday, March 18, 2024.

Members Sought for City of Cambridge Planning Board

Feb 12, 2024 – The City of Cambridge is seeking members to serve on the Planning Board. All Cambridge residents are invited to apply.City Seal

The Planning Board is made up of Cambridge residents who make recommendations and decisions about urban development on behalf of the City of Cambridge. The Planning Board has seven full members and two associate members who are appointed by the City Manager, and then approved by the City Council to serve a 5-year term. All members can participate in Planning Board discussions.

The Planning Board meets regularly in a public forum to discuss the City of Cambridge’s urban planning objectives, and apply them in the following ways:

  • Reviewing major urban development proposals, granting certain types of special permits when they are needed, and putting conditions on special permit approval. The Planning Board reviews about 20-25 special permit cases each year;
  • Reviewing proposed amendments to the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance, which sets rules for urban development, and making recommendations to the Cambridge City Council. The Planning Board reviews about 10-15 proposed zoning amendments each year;
  • Making recommendations to the Cambridge Board of Zoning Appeal (BZA) on some cases. The BZA is a different board that grants some special permits and variances.
  • Discussing other City of Cambridge planning efforts.

Anyone who lives in Cambridge can apply to serve on the Planning Board. You don’t need to be a homeowner. The city is committed to advancing a culture of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. All board and commission members in Cambridge must have the ability to work and interact effectively with individuals and groups with a variety of identities, cultures, backgrounds, and ideologies. Women, Black, Indigenous and other people of color, veterans, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and persons with disabilities are encouraged to apply.

No specific professional background is needed to serve on the Planning Board. However, since a big part of the Planning Board’s role is reviewing building plans and designs, it is important that members have a strong interest and enthusiasm for urban design and how it shapes the community. Successful members of the Planning Board will be able to:

  • Engage in a constructive discussion of urban planning topics, including urban design, transportation, housing, infrastructure planning, public space, and other topics;
  • Listen to people from diverse backgrounds and perspectives and consider different points of view;
  • Visit and learn about different parts of Cambridge, and bring experience from other cities that members have visited, lived in, or learned about;
  • Ask critical questions and make sure to get clear answers;
  • Work toward constructive solutions to complex problems;
  • Collaborate and build consensus with a group of people;
  • Learn about and understand the laws related to planning and zoning; and
  • Make reasonable decisions on behalf of the City that follow those laws.

We strongly suggest that people who are interested in the Planning Board attend or watch a Planning Board meeting. Visit www.cambridgema.gov/planningboard to learn about upcoming meetings. Archived video of meetings can be found on the City’s website here (then scroll to “Available Archives” / “Planning Board”).

By state law, all board members must complete a training in ethics and conflict-of-interest laws. The City’s Law Department also provides training and assistance to Planning Board members on legal issues. The City of Cambridge provides training to employees on topics including Preventing Sexual Harassment and Valuing Anti-Racism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. These trainings will be available to Planning Board members and may be required.

The Planning Board is supported by professional planning staff in the Community Development Department, with added support from the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department, the Department of Public Works, and others. Staff give written reports to Planning Board members on cases that are before them, and are also available if members have questions. Staff may also develop training on other topics that are relevant to the Planning Board’s work and may direct Planning Board members to training offered by outside organizations.

The Planning Board usually meets 2-4 times each month on Tuesday evenings at 6:30pm. Meetings can last about 3-4 hours. Members are expected to attend most meetings. Members can expect to spend about 2-4 hours before each meeting reviewing materials such as plans and documents, which are sent to members about 5 days before each meeting. Some members find it helpful to visit sites that they are reviewing in person, but it is not required.

The Massachusetts Open Meeting Law usually requires meetings to be in person. However, the Planning Board has been meeting remotely under the temporary Open Meeting Law provisions established during the COVID-19 pandemic and may continue to meet remotely through March 2025. For remote meetings, Planning Board members must have a computer or other device with an internet connection, camera, and microphone that can support video conferencing. It is also helpful to have a private place to attend remote meetings without distractions.

Planning Board members receive $6,000 per year as a stipend. This stipend is meant to offset the annual out-of-pocket costs that members might pay to make it possible to serve on the Planning Board, such as child care, transportation, and other expenses.

People interested in being considered should apply by using the City’s online application system at www.cambridgema.gov/apply and selecting “Planning Board” in the list of Current Vacancies. During the application process, you should provide a cover letter to explain why you are interested in being on the Planning Board, and a résumé or summary of applicable experience. Experience can include both professional and volunteer work.

The deadline for submitting applications is Monday, March 18, 2024.

If you have questions, contact Swaathi Joseph in the Community Development Department at 617-349-4668 or sjoseph@cambridgema.gov or visit www.cambridgema.gov/planningboard

The City of Cambridge is committed to advancing a culture of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. All board and commission members in Cambridge must have the ability to work and interact effectively with individuals and groups with a variety of identities, cultures, backgrounds, and ideologies. Women, minorities, veterans, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and persons with disabilities are encouraged to apply.

February 24, 2024

Gently Stepping Forward – February 26, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Central Square,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 2:12 pm

Gently Stepping Forward – February 26, 2024 Cambridge City Council meeting

City HallThe previous meeting featured some rather obvious jostling for position in the process of evaluating the recent Charter Review Final Report and deciding any charter change proposal. This week should bring even more of this power struggle when the question of “next steps” is taken up. The report has already been sent to the Law Department, the Election Commission, and perhaps more departments for review, but the question now is whether this should be initially vetted within the Government Operations Committee (chaired by Councillor Toner) or if Councillor Nolan (and perhaps others) will try to bypass that initial review by creating some kind of ad-hoc committee-of-the-whole so that she can gain more control of the process. This, of course, is intertwined with the election of Mayor Simmons who appoints all the City Council committees – and those appointments were done with some care.

I will say right now that some of the proposed Charter recommendations are virtually assured to be dead on arrival at the State House, but I don’t yet know if the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government (or whatever committee takes up such matters) can take an à-la-carte approach to proposed city charters or if it’s all-or-nothing. Before any modified Charter can go before Cambridge voters, it must first clear this hurdle.

I will also say that there are some aspects of the structure of Cambridge government that really should be rolled into any new Charter but which the Charter Review Committee never considered, e.g. the Special Acts that established/empowered the License Commission, the Election Commission, the Traffic Board, the Cambridge Health Alliance, the Cambridge Housing Authority, and the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority. It is commendable that the Committee chose to consolidate most of the charter specifics that were only referenced in the Plan E sections of M.G.L. Chapter 43 (sections 93-116) – at the suggestion of the Collins Center staff who were advising the Committee – but this was incomplete, probably because of lack of expertise on those specifics within the Collins Center staff. This is especially true of matters involving our proportional representation elections (an essential component of Plan E). There may be good reasons to leave some of these out of the Charter, but since they are part of how we do business, these questions should at least be part of the current discussion. [Needless to say, this should have been discussed within the now-dissolved Charter Review Committee, but that’s another conversation that has much to do with how that committee was formed.]

Here are the agenda items that caught my eye this week:

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to appointments and reappointments of members to the Cambridge Bicycle Committee.
pulled by Nolan; PN wants committees to be “commissions” so that City Council would gain more control over these appointments, asks about whether diversity of opinion is a factor in appointments; Iram Farooq claims there is some diversity, but acknowledges that these committees are primarily advocates rather than representatives; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to appointments and reappointments of members to the Cambridge Pedestrian Committee.
pulled by Nolan; no additional comments; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, Policy Order Response #24-15 dated Feb 12, 2024 regarding drafting zoning language and related changes to allow for and encourage the continued growth, redevelopment, and evolution of Central Square. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; JSW wants to know when this would go to Planning Board; Farooq says it goes to PB when petition is filed and during the process; Toner asks if this will build upon work already done; Farooq says YES, and that advisory committees need not be consulted (really?); Nolan suggests that better methods of informing community should be considered; Pickett asks if Central Square Lots study will be integrated and how; Farooq says study in its final stages; Wilson agrees re: communication with residents; Placed on File 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Charter Right #1. That the Final Report of the Charter Review Committee be referred to the Government Operations, Rules and Claims Committee. [Charter Right – Simmons, Feb 12, 2024]
Toner says conversation should start in Gov’t Operations Committee; Nolan OK with starting there, but says it should not stay there – noting that she and Siddiqui are “deeply involved in this” (quite the understatement); Pickett draws parallel with how possible Rules changes are now being considered in committee; Siddiqui OK with starting in committee, but will participate and “brainstorming” with suggestion of a robust process; Toner explains process of culling ideas from councillors, legal questions, timeline; Wilson wants a community conversation around this; Referred to Gov’t Ops. 8-0-1 (Azeem Absent)

Resolution #6. Resolution on the death of Charles Fried.   Councillor Nolan

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to present recommendations for the refinement and improvement of the housing permitting process to the City Council, with a focus on reducing delays, minimizing costs, and enhancing clarity and accessibility for all stakeholders.   Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; Toner proposed amendments; JSW wants to keep “affordable” language, wants to add other groups for consultation; Toner motion to change “affordable housing” to “housing” Fails 2-6-1 (MM,PT-YES; PN,JP,SS,JSW,AW,DS-No; BA-Absent); Toner motion on simplifying processes to all housing and not just “affordable” housing, McGovern says middle-income housing should be included; Adopted 8-0-1; JSW motion to amend Toner motion to add two additional groups Adopted 8-0-1; Toner motion as amended Adopted 8-0-1; Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (BA Absent)

Order #2. City Council support of H.4138, The Affordable Homes Act, and urge legislators to retain the provisions for a location option transfer fee.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Simmons
pulled by Toner; Toner will vote NO on proposed transfer fee; Nolan says Council has supported transfer fee in the past, delivers a prepared speech, says that this would not enact a tax or fee but only permit that local option (this is unbelievably naive), notes that legislation would set the range of possible fees, says this is about local control (but this begs the question about other proposed “local control” proposal to allow municipalities to create their own rent control laws); Nolan suggests motivation for supporting this is so that other municipalities would enact such a tax (again, very naive); McGovern concurs with Nolan, quotes David Kale in asserting that commercial transactions are lion’s share and that some residential exemptions could be made, expresses desire to take in as much revenue as possible; Pickett asks how this relates to existing Home Rule Petition now before the State Legislature, notes that there is already a $4.56/thousand stamp tax by state and that this would be on top of that; JSW uptalks that Legislature could act on our and Somerville’s and Cambridge’s petitions or pass current legislation, deflects by asserting that revenue raised could be used for other purposes; Pickett wants homeowners to gain maximum value in the sale of their greatest financial asset; Wilson offers generalities and suggestion that this might not lead to a tax; Simmons notes that we do use CPA fund for this but characterizes this as a “shortfall” and that (unlimited) more money is needed, notes Envision report and suggests that what we are doing is not enough; Order Adopted 6-2-1 (JP,PT – No; BA Absent)

Order #5. That the City Manager is hereby directed to confer with the City Manager’s Housing Liaison, Community Development Department, and the Cambridge Housing Authority on the feasibility of municipally-funded housing vouchers.   Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, Wilson, Pickett (who offers amendments); Nolan supports order and JP amendments; McGovern asks of motion-makers are OK with the amendments; Wilson supports amendments; both JP amendments adopted 8-0-1; Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to report back to the City Council with the data analysis included in the Economic Feasibility Analysis provided to EOHLC as part of Cambridge’s MBTA Communities final compliance submission.   Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; Order Adopted 8-0-1

January 17, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 605-606: January 16, 2024

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Cambridge government,Cambridge InsideOut,campaign finance,Charter,City Council,cycling,elections,planning,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 9:30 am

Episode 605 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 16, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Jan 16, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Shout out to DPW; OCPF reports due Jan 20; Council committees pending; Clean Slate at Jan 8 Council meeting; Jerry’s Pond; dealing with the nonresident protesters and bad political theater. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

Episode 606 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 16, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Jan 16, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Looking back at the 2022-23 City Council term and ahead to the 2024-25 term; single-issue advocacy at the root of the problem, need for cost/benefit analysis – examples with transportation, housing, energy; Charter considerations; phantom Traffic Board; confounded analysis of slate voting; and a Big Wish for better Squares and more fun. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

December 7, 2023

Cleaning Out the Pantry – December 11, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 5:48 pm

Cleaning Out the Pantry – December 11, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

The clock is winding down on the 2022-23 City Council and with Festivus approaching this may be the time for not only clearing out all the stuff beyond their expiration dates but also for the airing of grievances and the taking of a few parting shots.Running Down the Clock

Of special note is the opinion from the Acting City Solicitor regarding the forwarding of pending matters (and some really moldy ones) to the new City Council term. My fervent hope is that the current City Council votes to forward only significant pending matters and that the other items on “Awaiting Report” be allowed to fade into history or be re-introduced fresh in the new Council term.

Regarding the Festivus tradition of “airing of grievances”, Mr. Zondervan is back with his withdrawn Order from last week in which he tries to “educate” the Cambridge Police Department. This term can’t end soon enough.

There’s also a request from the Charter Review Committee requesting a one-month extension. This reminds me of the old joke we used to say when I worked (for 14 years) at Wellesley College:
  Q: How many Wellesley students does it take to change a light bulb?
  A: Just one, but she needs an extension.

Anyway, here are the items I found noteworthy in this penultimate City Council agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item 23-57, regarding rodent control measures. (CM23#296) [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by PN, Owen O’Riordan, John Nardone, Dave Powers, QZ, AM, SS; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Cambridge Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. (CM23#297) [Cover Letter] [NHMP presentation] [NHMP 2023 Update]
pulled by Nolan; comments by PN, DC, Sam Lipson, Iram Farooq, QZ, Owen O’Riordan, Tom Cahill; Plan Adopted 9-0, Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on the City of the Cambridge and Harvard University memorandum of agreement regarding Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT). (CM23#298)
Placed on File 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Cambridge Police Department to fundamentally change how it responds to situations that could lead to violence and death.   Councillor Zondervan (PO23#215)
pulled by Zondervan; Charter Right – Zondervan

Order #2. Transferring Items from the 2022-2023 Legislative Session.   Mayor Siddiqui (PO23#216)
pulled by Nolan w/Comm. & Reports #2; comments by PN, SS, QZ; Order Adopted 9-0

Communications & Reports #2. A communication from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, transmitting legal opinion regarding Carry Over Procedures for City Council Business. (COF23#228)
pulled early by Nolan; Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #4. A communication from the Cambridge Charter Review Committee Chair, Kathleen Leahy Born, transmitting a memorandum with a request for an extension through Jan 31, 2024. (COF23#230)
pulled by Siddiqui; comments by BA (who seems to think the Charter Review Committee was “nonpolitical”), PN (notes general lack of public involvement until very last meeting), DS (concerns about participation by committee members); one-month extension approved 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

December 3, 2023

Robots Rule – December 4, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge government,Charter,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 8:28 pm

Robots Rule – December 4, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Robot - Lost in SpaceThe first thing that struck me when I looked over the meeting agenda was the list of 387 Communications – more than twice anything I’ve seen before (except for that Bergman stunt many years ago with messages submitted on paper plates – but that’s another story). So I decided to look them over in some detail. The main thing is that 288 of them were nearly identical concerning that Gaza order from the Nov 20 meeting and were sent via a robot (from “actionnetwork.org”) and addressed to “City Clerk Alex Geourntas” – who happens to be the City Clerk for Boston. [Our actual City Clerk is Diane LeBlanc, by the way.] So much for doing your homework, but I suppose even robots may have dogs who like to eat their homework. Perhaps the funniest of these was the one signed by former Cambridge City Clerk Margaret Drury who apparently didn’t take notice of the addressee in the robotic message that was sent under her name to the wrong City Clerk.

There are 333 messages in favor of the Gaza order, 8 opposed, 4 who suggested that the City Council should instead focus on local matters (there’s a concept), and one suggesting that such communications should be limited to actual Cambridge residents. There were 148 of 288 robotic Gaza messages from Cambridge residents and 139 from non-residents. There was also one Somerville resident who defiantly stated that “you have lost my vote.” They never had your vote, Einstein.

There are also 17 communications from people who are apparently pissed off at the City Council’s Nov 20 “Present” vote on the matter – apparently an attempt to sidestep taking a definitive position. Voting on foreign affairs has never been off-limits in the past, but I guess this one is different because of the various constituencies and the political consideration of siding with or opposing something associated with our local “Squad” representative in the U.S. Congress.

I think the new City Council should consider a rules change to address this proliferation of robot-generated messages – perhaps replacing them with a single communication of the form “sundry messages (288) received in support of Nov 20 order re: Gaza.” Together with new AI tools becoming available all the time, we may otherwise soon see weekly bundles of hundreds or even thousands of communications generated every week bearing little connection to matters actually relevant to Cambridge.

Also noteworthy is the message sent by a member of Siddiqui’s hand-picked Charter Review Committee in which she wants to know the head count of all those making public comment or submitting (robotic) communications on either side of the issue. Perhaps the next iteration of the charter recommendations will include a proposal for popular plebiscite to determine public policy. Give us Barabbas. I honestly believe the entire Charter Review business should be restarted with a properly selected charter commission and all meetings held in public session rather than the Zoom-based insular meetings of the current failed process that had negligible public participation.

By the way, the minutes of the Nov 20 meeting indicate that of the 159 people who spoke in person or remotely, 100 supported the Gaza order, 47 were opposed, and 12 others addressed matters that were actually relevant to the business of the Cambridge City Council.

One last note: I am especially appreciative of the Nov 30 public comment and the Dec 4 communication from Cara Seiderman re: the Gaza ceasefire order. It takes a good deal of bravery for a prominent City employee to make a statement opposing the Gaza order as written in an environment where many of the people with whom she regularly interacts may be hostile to her point of view. Cancel culture has unfortunately become part of Cambridge culture – and not just on the Harvard campus.

There is an actual agenda for the Dec 4 meeting that contains a few interesting items. Here’s a sampler:

Manager’s Agenda #3. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a report on the evaluation of the 2023 Street Cleaning Pilot. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the evaluation of the 2023 Street Cleaning Pilot and recommended language for special legislation to increase fines.
Order Adopted 7-2 (DS,PT-No)

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $4,280,000, from Free Cash to the Public Investment Fund Human Services Extraordinary Expenditures account to support major ongoing improvements at Danehy Park including turf field and track replacement, irrigation improvements, water feature replacement, and capital improvement planning. [text of report]
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Planning Board recommendation not to adopt the Pierson, et al., Zoning Petition.
Placed on File 9-0

Charter Right #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Home Rule petition regarding the Fire Chief position. [Charter Right – Toner, Nov 20, 2023]
Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A late communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, regarding a home rule petition for taking the Fire Chief position out of civil service. (CM23#290)
Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #5. An Ordinance 2023 #10 has been received from City Clerk, relative to the Municipal Code of the City of Cambridge be amended in Chapter 8.16.081, Leaf Blowers. [Pass to 2nd Reading Nov 6, 2023; Eligible to be ordained on or after Nov 28, 2023] (ORD23#10)
pulled by Toner; comments by PT, PN, QZ; Ordained as Amended 9-0

Committee Report #6. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Nov 28, 2023 to discuss proposed changes to the Cambridge Municipal Code that would lead to a phased-out ban of the use of gas-powered leaf blowers in Cambridge. The Committee voted to send the proposed ordinance language as amended in Committee to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation that the language passed to a second reading on Nov 6, 2023 be further amended to reflect the change in transition date, (8.16.081.4 – Transition, 2. and 3.) from March 15, 2027 to March 15, 2026. (text of report)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Unfinished Business #7. An Ordinance 2023 #11 has been received from City Clerk, relative to Chapter 2.131 – American Freedmen Commission. [Passed to 2nd Reading Nov 20, 2023; Eligible to be ordained on or after Dec 4, 2023]
Ordained as Amended 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant departments and with state and federal regulators to establish an orderly testing and deployment strategy for Full Self Driving on Cambridge roads.   Councillor Zondervan
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #2. That the City Council go on record requesting that MIT withdraw its objection to Eversource and the City of Cambridge proposed transmission line route so that the project can move forward expediently.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to work with CPD to fundamentally change how it responds to situations that could lead to violence and death.   Councillor Zondervan
Order Withdrawn

Committee Report #1. The Finance Committee held a public hearing on Oct 31, 2023 to discuss updates on the Participatory Budget and ARPA. (text of report)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts and Celebrations Committee held a public hearing on Tues, Nov 14, 2023 to discuss the City’s proposed Linear Park redesign. (text of report)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Public Safety Committee held a public hearing on Nov 15, 2023 to discuss and receive updates from the Community Safety Department and HEART. (text of report)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #4. The City Council’s Ad Hoc Committee on the City Managers evaluation process held a public meeting on Nov 17, 2023 to discuss the updates on the evaluation process. (text of report)
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #5. A public meeting of the Ordinance Committee was held on Tues, Nov 28, 2023. The call of the meeting was to consider an amendment to the Building Energy Use Disclosure Ordinance that would require new covered properties to achieve net zero by 2030. The Committee voted to send the following amendment language back to the City Council with no recommendation. (text of report)
pulled early by Toner; comments by PT, Yi-An Huang (feels this is not good policy in terms of cost/benefit), QZ (disagrees, proposes amendment), PN, DC, MM, Iram Farooq, Megan Bayer (Acting City Solicitor), QZ proposes amendments (passes 5-4 (BA,AM,DS,PT-No); Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended 5-4 (BA,AM,DS,PT-No); Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Late Resolution #3. Resolution on the death of Bernard Goldberg.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Simmons

October 13, 2023

Another Monday Night of Diminished Expectations – October 16, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Filed under: 2023 election,Cambridge,Central Square,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:31 am

Another Monday Night of Diminished Expectations – October 16, 2023 Cambridge City Council meeting

Conspicuously absent from this week’s Peoples Republic of Cambridge International Affairs Agenda is a resolution where incumbent city councillors actually have to say out loud their take on what recently transpired in Israel. Bothsidesism gives way to nosidesism as they gauge how voters might respond. Meanwhile, a vote on “AHO 2.0” to further disenfranchise residents is expected to breeze through on the same 6-3 vote (while they still can). Then there’s reparations. Here are a few things:Peoples Republic of Cambridge

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Policy Order #23-147, regarding a report on whether change in language to the CSO is necessary to enable installation of permanent, seasonal, and/or temporary outdoor dining and pop-ups alongside separated bicycle lanes consistent with Cycling Safety Ordinance that address concerns about the current situation.
Referred to Ordinance Committee 8-1 (QZ-No)

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the establishment of an Opioid Settlement Stabilization Fund.
Order Adopted; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of $1,903,731.64 from Free Cash to the Opioid Settlement Stabilization Fund. The $1,903,731.64 appropriated to the Opioid Settlement Stabilization Fund is the only the appropriation from Free Cash attributed to Opioid Settlement funds and will be used to fund specific future projects, per requirements of the settlement agreement, which will require separate individual appropriations by the City Council.
Appropriation Adopted; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 23-23 which clarifies the state law on zoning petition signature requirements to ensure clarity and lawful deliberation in the future.
Placed on File 9-0

Charter Right #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with the License Commission and other relevant departments to prepare recommendations on regulations that would ban or limit the sale of nips in Cambridge. [Charter Right – Toner, Oct 2, 2023]
Adopted as Amended 9-0

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to reaffirm the city’s commitment to renovating the schoolhouse at 105 Windsor Street as a top priority following the completion of the Central Square lots study. [Charter Right – Simmons, Oct 2, 2023]
Adopted as Amended 9-0

Unfinished Business #3. An Ordinance has been received from City Council, relative to Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) amendments. (Proposed Ordinance #2023-7) [Passed to 2nd Reading, Sept 11, 2023; Amended Sept 18, 2023; Amended Further Sept 18, 2023; Eligible to be Ordained; Expires Oct 29, 2023] (ORD23#7)
Ordained 6-3 (BA,AM,MM,DS,QZ-Yes; DC,PN,PT-No)

Unfinished Business #4. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to 2.76.020 enacted is to protect the human rights of all the residents of the City Protect Family Inclusion and Relationship Diversity [Passed to 2nd Reading, Oct 2, 2023] (ORD23#8)

Resolution #12. Resolution on the retirement of Steven A. Cohen from the City of Cambridge Planning Board.   Councillor Carlone

Resolution #13. Resolution of the retirement of Hugh Adams Russell from the City of Cambridge Planning Board.   Councillor Carlone

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to conduct a thorough assessment regarding the feasibility, costs, and benefits of replacing the existing community notice boards on the front lawn of City Hall with one or two digital signs.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toner
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department, the Finance Department, and any other relevant departments to investigate potential mechanisms to support Cannabis Business in Cambridge.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate City staff to establish an American Freedmen Commission.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Zondervan, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted, Referred to Ordinance Committee 9-0

Order #8. That the City Council schedule a roundtable on Mon, Nov 13, 2023, from 3pm-5pm to receive an update from the City Manager and relevant departments on the Central Square City Lots Study.   Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #9. That the City Manager is requested to work with DPW to restore Linear Park by re-using the existing award-winning design, to create, publish and implement a climate resilience-based maintenance plan and minimize the embodied carbon of the project by re-using, wherever possible, the existing lamps and lamp posts.   Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner, Councillor Zondervan
Order Adopted as Amended, Referred to Neighborhood & Long-Term Planning Committee 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Housing Committee held a public hearing on Apr 13, 2023 to continue the discussion of potential amendments to the Affordable Housing Overlay district as outline in the Nov 21, 2022 Policy Order adopted by the City Council. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on Sept 27, 2023 to discuss the report and update on the City of Cambridge Disparity Study. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. A public meeting of the Cambridge City Council’s Ordinance Committee was held on Wed, Oct 4, 2023, to discuss changes to the Municipal Code of the City of Cambridge relative to Chapter 5.50, Cannabis Business Permitting. The Committee approved a motion that the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with the Law Department, the Finance Department, and any other relevant departments to investigate potential mechanisms to support Cannabis Business in Cambridge, including but not limited to: not collecting the local tax on Cannabis product sales, refunding some of the rent that was paid while awaiting a Special Permit, and limiting the number of stores that are allowed and report back to the City Council by Nov 20, 2023. The related policy order is on this agenda. The Committee voted to send the proposed ordinance language, as amended in Committee to the Full City Council with a favorable recommendation to pass to a second reading. [text of report]
Placed on File, Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

Committee Report #4. A public meeting of the Cambridge City Council’s Ordinance Committee was held on Tues, Oct 10, 2023. The Committee approved a motion to send the Zoning Ordinance Petition relative to hen keeping to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation to pass to a second reading. [text of report]
Placed on File, Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress