Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

December 5, 2021

Preview of December 6, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting – T Minus Two Meetings

Filed under: Cambridge,City Council,covid — Tags: , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:35 pm

Preview of December 6, 2021 Cambridge City Council meeting – T Minus Two Meetings

The Pandemic Council Term is winding down even as the Omicron Variant is winding up for the next term. I fully expect another two years of coronagendas pushed through under the Shadow of Zoom.Running Down the Clock

Here are a few items of possible interest for this week:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a COVID-19 update.
Placed on File 8-0-1 (Nolan – ABSENT)

Suffice to say that the latest rates of positive tests have been quite alarming – even though fatalities have become quite rare (as he searches for wood on which to vigorously knock). I would very much appreciate more information about where the increased positive tests are rooted. It appears as though the university populations and younger people are the chief contributors, but many of us would like more clarity.


Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appointment of the following persons as new members of the Family Policy Council effective Dec 1, 2021: Wendy Georgan, Tabithlee Howard, Sophie Goldman, Elijah Lee-Robinson, Elaine Wen
Placed on File 9-0

Order #7. That the City Manager is requested to instruct the City Solicitor to draft the appropriate ordinance amendments for the City Council to review following the recent charter amendments.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Simmons – ABSENT)

<sarcasm>I believe we need to see a report detailing the status of each of these appointees in terms of ethnic representativeness, rental status, and philosophy regarding housing density. After all, Family Policy is Housing Policy. Please wait until after January 1 to refer these appointments to the Civic Unity Committee.</sarcasm>

I am looking forward to seeing how the tribunals will be structured for the evaluation of the worthiness of citizen volunteers by a panel of clueless and politically motivated councillors. Meanwhile, all I have heard regarding the rather important matter of choosing the next City Manager is a throng of crickets.


Manager’s Agenda #14. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-88, regarding amendments to the draft Ordinance to limit and monitor campaign donations by individuals seeking financial benefit from the City of Cambridge. [Solicitor’s response]
Referred to Proposed Ordinance 7-0-0-2 (Simmons, Toomey – PRESENT)

On the Table #1. That the City Council adopt a municipal ordinance to reduce or limit campaign donations from donors seeking to enter into a contract, seeking approval for a special permit or up-zoning, seeking to acquire real estate from the city, or seeking financial assistance from the city; Ordinance #2020-27. [Tabled – Nov 8, 2021]
Taken from Table 9-0; Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended 7-2 (Simmons, Toomey – NO)

On the Table #2. That the attached Home Petition titled “Petition For An Act Authorizing The City Of Cambridge To Enact An Ordinance To Limit And Monitor Campaign Donations In Local Elections By Individuals Seeking Financial Reward From The City Of Cambridge” be forwarded to the General Court for adoption. [Tabled – Nov 8, 2021]
Taken from Table 9-0; Placed Back on Table 8-0-0-1 (Simmons – PRESENT)

For what it’s worth, I don’t actually support these restrictions. I’m all for disclosure, and I do my best to help illuminate campaign donations, but the forced imposition of restrictions like those in the proposed ordinance is a slippery slope that serves no useful purpose and is based on the loosiest and goosiest of interpretations and carve-outs for politically acceptable influence-purchasing. Every candidate is free to refuse donations from any source or to highlight the acceptance of those donations by their competitors.

And just to piss off anyone who continues to lose sleep over the Citizens United case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, I actually agree that the right to raise and spend money falls under the category of “free speech”. That said, I think everyone should cast a suspicious eye toward Super-PACs, Independent Expenditure PACs (which, lets face it, often aren’t all that independent of the candidates they support), and any other vehicle used to purchase election victories. Perhaps a more relevant pursuit would be to ensure that all credible candidates are guaranteed widely accessible free platforms via which voters can get to know them.

Some of the most lavishly-funded campaigns derive their treasures not from “individuals seeking financial reward from the City of Cambridge” but from highly-paid professionals who enjoy great access and influence with the councillors they support. I will add that I find it endlessly entertaining to listen to the rhetorical contortions of councillors arguing both sides of this issue. Everyone is always looking for an edge.


Communications #1-6 all address concerns about the recent N. Mass. Ave. bus and bike lane installation and its impacts on traffic and commercial viability.Traffic - North Mass Ave - photo from Save Mass Ave site

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to confer with appropriate departments on what the standard public process will be prior to implementing new sections of bike lanes, and what general evaluation process will take place post-installation.   Councillor Toomey, Councillor Simmons
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

The problem, of course, is that the City Council passed amendments to the Bike Safety Ordinance that essentially limits public process to little more than a discussion over the color of the flex posts. Considerations of such things as the viability of businesses, traffic congestion, and even actual bike safety must take a back seat to everything except perceived safety and the comfort of cyclists.

Order #3. That the Cambridge City Council condemns, in the strongest possible terms, any actions that may result in the physical injury of any individual, regardless of their support or non-support, of the bike/bus lane implementation on Massachusetts Avenue.   Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon
Order Adopted 7-0-0-2 (Simmons, Toomey – PRESENT)

To any idiot who thinks that you can advance your cause by spreading tacks or bricks or broken glass in bike lanes: Violence is a poor substitute for reason, persistence, or even mockery. Try winning your argument with wit and wisdom instead. Even if you don’t prevail you can still live with your conscience (assuming you have one).


Order #2. City Council opposition to the MBTA’s plans to introduce new diesel infrastructure at the North Cambridge Garage and buses with diesel heaters.   Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Placed on File (motion of Mallon) 8-1 (Zondervan – NO)

Order #6. That the City Clerk is requested to forward the Home Rule Petition establishing a Net Zero emissions requirement for building construction in Cambridge in accordance with its Net Zero Action Plan, adopted in 2015, to the entire state legislative delegation for immediate adoption.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Carlone
Charter Right – Zondervan

I will soon be getting insulation pumped into all the outer walls of my building, and I think most Cambridge property owners are receptive to greater energy efficiency in their buildings. That said, I am always suspicious of actions by the City Council that may potentially lead to dramatic increases in the cost of home renovations.

Order #8. That the City Manager is requested to direct the City Solicitor to draft home rule language to establish a Cambridge Jobs Creation Trust for City Council review by the Dec 20, 2021 regular City Council meeting.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

It sure seems as though this City Council is poised to jack up the linkage fee on new commercial developments as high as legally possible regardless of the intended or unintended consequences. Any reasonable person likely supports job creation for residents, but the proposed Cambridge Jobs Creation Trust seems more like a justification for an increase in the linkage fee than anything else.

Order #9. That a special meeting of the City Council, School Committee, Cambridge Health Department and other appropriate city and school staff be scheduled to discuss the findings of the 2021 Cambridge Teen Health Survey for Middle and High School students and what immediate interventions are going to be implemented in response to concerns.   Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Carlone – ABSENT)

Suffice to say that the statements “46% of high school students and 31% of middle school students reported feeling tense, nervous, or worried every day for two or more weeks in a row” and “35% of high school students and 27% of middle school students reported feeling so sad or hopeless almost every day for 2 weeks or more that they stopped doing usual activities” may well apply to a lot of people at various times during the pandemic. – Robert Winters

Comments?

November 16, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 525-526: November 16, 2021

Episode 525 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 16, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Nov 16, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Final Election process; reprecincting; Boncore vacancy; non-implementation of planning efforts in Alewife and Central Square; Alewife and Envision chronology; failure of well-paid councillors to show up for work; deep pockets and the means to achieve good results. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters
[On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 526 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 16, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Nov 16, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: Detailed election results and analysis; the dominance of incumbency; political spin in the absence of mandates; importance of establishing a loyal political base vs. “movement” candidates; winners & feeders; slate voting results; Siddiqui’s margin of victory and dissatisfaction with other candidates; the Cincinnati problem; ballot transfers, #2 votes, alternate measures of popularity; School Committee campaign finance. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

November 7, 2021

Post-Election Mayoral Arm-Twisting Season Begins – November 8, 2021 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Post-Election Mayoral Arm-Twisting Season Begins – November 8, 2021 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Mayor Al VellucciThe Election is over save for the overseas votes, and it’s pretty much a wash. We replaced the retiring Tim Toomey with Paul Toner, and, for the kids, Sobrinho-Wheeler with Burhan Azeem. All of the incumbents were reelected to the School Committee and we added the lavishly well-funded Akriti Bhambi to fill the soon-to-be vacated seat. It’s always interesting to see how people associated with the various slates view these elections entirely through the lens of their respective slates and agendas with barely any acknowledgment of the fact that almost all of the incumbents were reelected based on their individual campaigns.City Hall coin

Now begins the season of phone calls and private meetings during which the various mayoral hopefuls try to make their case to be the next all-powerful weak mayor. Needless to say, Mayor Siddiqui’s 4121 #1 Votes gives her an edge (if she wants it), but I’m sure others will make the case in the name of “equity” and “whose turn it is” to ascend to the hallowed throne. Meanwhile, has anyone heard anything at all about where we stand on the rather important matter of selecting the next City Manager? Oops, I guess they must have forgotten.

As for the business of city councilling, here’s a sampler of what’s up for discussion/action/inaction this week:

Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-84 regarding BEUDO (Building Energy Use Disclosure Ordinance) proposed amendments. [CDD Memo] [current draft] [City Solicitor opinion]
Referred to Health & Environment Committee 9-0

Covered under the proposed amendments are: (1) municipal property with one or more buildings with 10,000 sq ft or more; (2) one or more non-residential building(s) where such building(s) singly or together contain 25,000 to 49,999 sq ft); and (3) one or more residential building(s) that singly or together contain 50 or more residential dwelling units – rental or condos. So my electric and gas bills can stay safely in my bottom drawer – for now. Some councillors are already looking ahead to the day when they can drop the bar down to cottages or people living in a van down by the river.

Unfinished Business #5. Ordinance #2021-24 (Oct 25, 2021 Order #3) That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to direct the City Solicitor and the appropriate staff to review the language of this proposed ordinance amendment and to report back to the City Council in advance of the next City Council meeting. [Passed to a 2nd Reading Oct 25, 2021; To Be Ordained on or after Nov 8, 2021]
Ordained as Amended 8-0-1 (Carlone – ABSENT)

How Dare You!This will pass 9-0 unless one of the councillors casts a protest vote because the proposal to label gas pumps doesn’t go far enough. Maybe the next step will be stenciling city roads with “How Dare You!” and a little Greta image.

Order #1. That the City Council go on record requesting that the forthcoming new Universal Design Playground located in Danehy Park be named the Louis A. DePasquale Universal Design Playground.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Toomey
Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler (don’t let the door hit you on the way out, councillor)

There are some who choose to protest the naming of public facilities after people who are either still living or still working for the city. Just a reminder that we’re not issuing postage stamps or minting coins (well, except for perhaps Al Vellucci). So here’s to Thomas W. Danehy Park, the Walter J. Sullivan Water Treatment Facility, the Robert W. Healy Public Safety Building, and Timothy J. Toomey Park, and the Louis A. DePasquale Universal Design Playground. My ideal is a bit different, courtesy of the late, great John Prine.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the appropriate City departments, as well as the Commission of Persons with Disabilities and the Special Education Parents Advisory Council, to develop a plan to install fully accessible equipment in every playground throughout the city.   Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toomey, Councillor Zondervan
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

This would be great, but presumably it means “in addition to the existing playground equipment” as opposed to “replace all playground equipment”. I doubt if monkey bars and skate parks can be made fully accessible.

Envision AlewifeOrder #4. That Article 20.90- Alewife Overlay Districts 1-6 of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance be amended to insert a new section entitled Section 20.94.3 – Temporarily prohibited uses.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor McGovern, Mayor Siddiqui
Charter Right – Toomey

Committee Report #1. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts & Celebrations Committee met on June 2, 2021 to conduct a public hearing to discuss the Alewife Envision Plan.
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I’m all for coming up with a grand vision for this area with multiple bridges crossing the tracks and all sorts of fun, new additions. That said, don’t you think all this grand visionary stuff should have been put in place long before parcels were sold with the presumption that they could be built out under existing zoning? Parcels in this area were apparently only very recently sold for a sum in the neighborhood of half a billion dollars. If the City were to now pass either temporary or permanent zoning changes that significantly decrease the development potential, it sure seems like a good case could be made by the new owners that they should be compensated for that loss. I hope that won’t happen, but this says a lot about the consequences of City Council inaction or lack of a coherent vision. By the way, the order contains one of the more interesting maps from the 1979 Alewife Revitalization study, a.k.a. “The Fishbook”.

Order #5. Upper Mass. Ave. Bike Lane Improvements.   Councillor Nolan
Amended 7-2 (DS,TT – NO); Charter Right – Simmons

The latest installment in the ongoing turf wars over roadway allocation where politicians deftly try to please all of the people all of the time. The problem here is, of course, that these things should never have been enshrined into an ordinance with inflexible mandates. But hey, don’t forget to sign The Pledge. Meanwhile, Cambridge roads are starting to feel more like a Habitrail for hamsters – overly prescriptive and thoroughly inflexible.

Committee Report #3. The Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning, Public Facilities, Arts & Celebrations Committee and the Housing Committee met on Aug 24, 2021 to conduct a joint follow-up hearing to continue the discussion on the elimination of single and two-family only zoning and restrictions on the type of housing that can be built city-wide.
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0An Even Better (Bigger) Cambridge

Now that the election has passed it will be interesting to see how fast The Densifiers try to rush through their Big Plans. I do like the idea of relaxing some of the restrictions to allow more multi-family homes, but I would prefer to see housing growth based more on available opportunities than on wholesale revision and density doubling densification based on a transient and trendy philosophy and historical revisionism. We have been down that road before.

Committee Report #4. The Ordinance Committee met on Oct 20, 2021 to conduct a hearing on an ordinance amendment to reduce or limit campaign donations.
Report Accepted, Placed on File 7-0-0-2 (DS,TT-Present)

Policy Order/Home Rule Petition: That the attached Home Petition titled “Petition For An Act Authorizing The City Of Cambridge To Enact An Ordinance To Limit And Monitor Campaign Donations In Local Elections By Individuals Seeking Financial Reward From The City Of Cambridge” be forwarded to the General Court for adoption.   Councillor Carlone
Order and Home Rule Petition Tabled 7-0-0-2 (DS,TT-Present)

Late Order #6. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to instruct the Law Department to provide a legal opinion regarding the effect of the proposed Ordinance to Limit and monitor campaign donations on the petitioners of a Citizens’ Petition and the Owners, Board members and employees of an organization seeking financial assistance from the City of Cambridge; and to draft enforcement language and to draft language exempting labor unions from the Ordinance and to provide an opinion about whether Somerville’s Ordinance regarding campaign donations would survive a legal challenge.   Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted 9-0

While I may agree with the general idea of this proposal, the devil may lie in the details. It’s not always so clear which donors to campaigns are seeking or will eventually receive financial reward. For example, if someone contributes either money or labor toward a political campaign and is currently hired or is later hired as a City Council Aide, would that be a violation? Or is political patronage not covered under the proposed ordinance? – Robert Winters

November 4, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 523-524: November 2, 2021

Episode 523 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 2, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Nov 2, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Election Day; turnout; early and mail-in voting; Candidate Page statistics; ballot questions & Quest for Control – selling control as “democracy”; truths about City boards & commissions; civic responsibilities; Federico Muchnik videos – Walden Square, The Tasty; reducing elections to “hot topics”. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters
[On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 524 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 2, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Nov 2, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: Changing rules for voter registration; auxiliary ballots, provisional ballots; preliminary vs. unofficial vs. official election results; campaign finance for City Council and School Committee; reporting the details of the PR Count; the down side of slate voting and the importance of voting for individuals. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

May 10, 2021

Of interest on the May 10, 2021 City Council Agenda

Of interest on the May 10, 2021 City Council Agenda

Big ticket loan authorizations, juggling finances, tax implications, political machinations and more.City Hall

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to a COVID-19 Update.
Placed on File 9-0

Communications & Reports #1. A communication was received from Mayor Sumbul Siddiqui transmitting questions for the COVID-19 Update.
Placed on File 9-0

I have been updating the COVID data and graphs every day for over a year now, and there is nothing I would like more than to see the daily new infections drop to zero so that the graphs will have literally nothing to show and we can all just call it a day and start focusing on other things. We are now down to single digits, and you can actually see faces emerging again.


Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting Communication from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the appropriation of the FY2021 Cultural Investment Portfolio Program Grant from the Massachusetts Cultural Council in the amount of $12,100 to the Grant Fund Historical Commission Salaries and Wages account ($12,100) which will continue to support part-time archives assistants, who maintain the public archive of Cambridge history.
Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-11 regarding filling vacant positions.
Placed on File 9-0

Leaving budgeted positions unfilled was a key component of the City’s strategy for navigating the pandemic with its diminished revenue and added expenses. This year’s Budget Book shows that FY2020 had an Adopted Budget of $665,550,940 but actual expenditures of $639,240,005 – a savings of $26,310,935. The FY2021 Adopted Budget was $702,432,985, but the Projected FY2021 expenditures are $705,360,745 – just $2,927,760 more than was adopted in June 2020. The new total FY2020 Budget is $735,203,865.

It remains to be seen what the net effect of the pandemic will be on revenues and the resulting tax rates that will be determined in the Fall. Suffice to say that commercial tax revenues are tied to income generation from those properties, and many of them remained vacant or partially vacant for much of this past year. I would like very much to learn more about the property tax abatement applications and whether or not this could result in a significant shift of the tax burden from commercial properties onto residential properties – even if only for a year or two. Needless to say, revenue sources like the hotel/motel tax will be a fraction of what they have been prior to the pandemic and many fees have been reduced or waived.

The Budget Hearings start tomorrow (Tues, May 11). This week’s hearing will include the Cambridge Police Department (CPD) Budget along with many other department budgets. Look for plenty of political grandstanding. The FY2020 CPD Adopted Budget was $63,384,730 and the FY2020 actual expenditures were $61,191,815. Last June the CPD Adopted Budget was $65,925,945 amidst the confused complaints of those who thought we were Minneapolis, and the FY2021 projected CPD expenditures should ring in at around $63,919,100. The FY2022 Budget calls for $68,731,130. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the City Council insisted on reducing this by some token amount just so they could include that in their campaign literature.

Don’t be surprised if by Tuesday evening you find me arguing in favor of replacing proportional representation elections by a system of random selection of 9 people from the Registered Voting List.

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 21-31, regarding funding for housing stabilization assistance in the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget.
Placed on File 9-0


Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $28,500,000 to provide funds for the construction of sewer separation, storm water management and combined sewer overflow reduction elimination improvements within River Street and Harvard Square areas as well as the Sewer Capital Repairs Program and climate change preparedness efforts.
Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $1,800,000 to provide funds for various Schools for projects that include: asbestos abatement in various schools, replace the front plaza and failing masonry wing walls and recaulking the building at the Haggerty School, replace emergency generator and extend exhaust at Cambridgeport, recaulking precast panels at CRLS Field House, unit vents engineering at the Fletcher Maynard Academy and Longfellow building and replace the gym floor at the Amigos School.
Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #10. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $10,000,000 to provide funds for the Municipal Facilities Improvement Plan. Funds will support improvements at the Department of Public Works Complex, Moses Youth Center HVAC Design, fire notification system installation at 11 buildings, Coffon building bathroom rehab and upgrades and MFIP study. Also, included is funding to support fire station improvements including: Lafayette Square fire station improvements (floor slab, kitchen and gym flooring replacement), Taylor Square fire station improvements (decontamination showers, installation and parapet improvement), East Cambridge fire station improvements (sanitary storm system replacement and generator installation) and Lexington Ave. fire station driveway construction.
Passed to 2nd Reading 8-0-1 (Simmons Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #11. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an order requesting the appropriation and authorization to borrow $5,000,000 to provide funds for the reconstruction of various City streets and sidewalks.
Passed to 2nd Reading 9-0

These loan authorizations (bonds) total $45,300,000. In addition, the FY2022 Public Investment Budget (Pay-As-You-Go) is proposed to be $38,610,865. This brings the total proposed amount for Public Investment to $83,910,865. The funding sources are: Bond Proceeds ($16,800,000), Chapter 90 ($2,706,330), Community Development Block Grant ($1,549,380), Departmental Revenue ($6,027,155), Mitigation Revenue ($3,403,000), Parking Fund Revenues ($1,150,000), Property Taxes ($15,725,000), Sewer Bond Proceeds ($28,500,000), Sewer Service Charges ($2,750,000), Water Fund Balance ($1,800,000), and Water Service Charges ($3,500,000)

The amounts associated with bonds will be paid over time through the Debt Service budget which was $74,269,970 (actual) in FY2020, $78,854,890 (projected) in FY2021, and $82,441,070 (proposed) for FY2022. Just for the sake of comparison over the years, the Debt Service was $8,277,290 in FY1992, $11,493,110 in FY2000, $23,917,070 in FY2005, $43,293,670 in FY2010, and $50,446,035 in FY2015. The choice to pay for much of the capital investments via bonds is at least in part due to the low interest rates we can get thanks to our AAA bond ratings.


Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to the first Cycling Safety Ordinance report which analyzes the block-by-block impacts of installing quick-build separated bike lanes on four specific segments of Massachusetts Avenue, as identified in Section 12.22.040 (E) of the ordinance.
Refer to Transportation & Public Utilities Committee 9-0

The rhetoric will be entertaining. Parking is now referred to as "private vehicle storage" in order to characterize it as diametrically opposite to "community benefit." The underlying presumption is that all righteous people will soon travel and shop via bicycle – except for those surly laborers who actually deliver your goods, fix your plumbing, install your solar panels and vegetated roofs, etc. By the way, how was your latte this morning?


Order #1. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to work with all relative city departments, the Central Square BID and the MBTA to close Mass Ave. from Prospect Street to Sydney Street on Friday and Saturday evenings from 7:00pm to 1:00am through September 2021 and report back to the Council.   Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons
Charter Right – Zondervan

I don’t yet know of anyone in the Central Square business community who supports this, and I’m sure that the traffic that’s diverted to the parallel residential streets will go over superbly with the residents on those streets. I’m not saying that there can’t be some positive aspects to this, but it strikes me as naive and political as opposed to informed and practical. Selectively re-purposing some streets in Central Square during certain hours and certain days has a lot of merit (and some of this is already planned), but vacating the Massachusetts Ave. roadway on weekend evenings seems neither necessary nor helpful. A more helpful suggestion would be to help facilitate a few summer weekend closures for festivals with music – assuming, of course, that the Covid numbers continue to drop.

Order #2. In support of H. 3559, An Act Relative to Public Transit Electrification.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Vice Mayor Mallon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toomey
Order Adopted 9-0 as Amended

This is specific to public transit and calls for (a) blocking any proposed conversion to fuel-powered buses on any of bus routes now powered by overhead wires; (b) having an all-electric MBTA bus fleet within approximately a decade; and (c) converting all commuter rail lines from diesel to electric. While I find a lot of this to be unnecessarily rigid, especially in terms of the durability and route flexibility of the buses, I would like to see not only the electrification of many of the commuter rail lines, but also the folding of some of those lines into an expanded rapid transit system with far more frequent service.

Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee met on Feb 24, 2021 conduct a public hearing on the following ordinance amendments.
(1) That the City Council adopt a municipal ordinance to reduce or limit campaign donations from donors seeking to enter into a contract, seeking approval for a special permit or up-zoning, seeking to acquire real estate from the city, or seeking financial assistance from the city.
(2) The Cambridge City Council direct the City Manager to work with the City Solicitor’s Office to draft a Home Rule Petition that would cap campaign contributions to any City Council candidate to $200 per person, per year, per candidate and limit candidate loans to $3,000 per election cycle.
Charter Right – McGovern

We have heard variations of these proposals more times than I care to count, and the legal complications of some of the proposed ideas aren’t even worth repeating at this point. It’s as though proposals like this are integral parts of the campaign rhetoric of some candidates – and whether they are ever implemented in some form is almost irrelevant.

Local political campaigns nowadays do not necessarily require a fortune to be successful – and there is a lot of evidence that the keys to a successful campaign have more to do with social media and shoe leather than with mammoth campaign war chests. In fact, there are some voters (like me) who look upon excessively funded campaigns with more suspicion than respect. The increasing role of political action committees (PACs) in local campaigns is not even being raised by city councillors, and that goes especially for those councillors who are backed by these PACs and appear on their candidate slates – even as the campaign accounts of these PACs are being converted to "Independent Expenditure PACs" with little or no transparency. [References: Cambridge City Council Campaign Receipts 2021 and Cambridge City Council Campaign Receipts 2019]

Personally, I would rather see voluntary caps on spending and full disclosure by all players in the political campaigns – including all organizations who are working to unlevel the playing field and influence the outcomes. A roster of all the people associated with these organizations would also be helpful since simply calling yourselves "Better" means about as much as saying "Make Cambridge Great Again" when what you’re really doing is just creating more investment opportunities to exploit (not that there’s anything wrong with investment). – Robert Winters

March 2, 2021

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 493-494: March 2, 2021

Episode 493 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 2, 2021 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Mar 2, 2021 at 6:00pm. Topics: Tree protection and reasonable latitude; Mayor Joe Curtatone of Somerville won’t seek reelection; campaign finance limits at the Ordinance Committee; legal issues with early/no-excuse absentee voting; roughing up the Voting Rights Act. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 494 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 2, 2021 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Mar 2, 2021 at 6:30pm. Topics: Alterations to single-family zoning up for discussion; Cambridge as a sandbox for national organizations and movements; factual vs. fictional history of Cambridge zoning; questioning support/guidelines for “neighborhood groups”; distinguishing neighborhood groups vs. advocacy groups vs. political groups; community schools program and neighborhood councils; Covid-19 update; Alewife zoning and a brief mention of the “land bank” proposal from 1990. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

December 16, 2020

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 483-484: December 15, 2020

Episode 483 – Cambridge InsideOut: Dec 15, 2020 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Dec 15, 2020 at 6:00pm. Topics: electoral college; first Covid vaccinations, testing, transmission; neighborhood groups; Dec 7 and Dec 14 City Council highlights; local history – sanitized or real; who speaks for “the community?” Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 484 – Cambridge InsideOut: Dec 15, 2020 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Dec 15, 2020 at 6:30pm. Topics: 2021 municipal candidates; OCPF; advocates vs. representatives; Covid-19 changes the issues; good intentions vs. reality; housing non-policies; renter’s market; ABC war against single-family homes; Starlight Square updates. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

November 4, 2020

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 477-478: November 3, 2020

Episode 477 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 3, 2020 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Nov 3, 2020 at 6:00pm. Topics: Election Day – Judgment Day; deaths of Rich McKinnon, Rick Jarvis; Covid updates; Nov 2 City Council Agenda – Resident Permit Parking Fee increase shot down; early signs of the 2021 municipal election; patio heaters and greenhouse gases. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 478 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 3, 2020 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Nov 3, 2020 at 6:30pm. Topics: Competing proposals to limit campaign donations, candidates loaning to their own campaigns; wealthy friends vs. developers; proposal to ban tear gas and some history; the morphing of boards & commissions. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress