Last week’s meeting cleared most of the leftovers out of the back of the legislative fridge. Here are some of the remainders and some new additions:
Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a request to move to Executive Session to discuss strategy with respect to litigation known as Said S. Abuzahra, Trustee of Equity Realty Trust, et al. v. City of Cambridge (Mdsx. Super. Ct. C.A. No. 2017- cv-2459); and strategy with respect to litigation known as Lubavitch of Cambridge, Inc. v. Jim Monteverde as member of the Cambridge Board of Zoning Appeals et al. (Land Court Docket No. 24 Misc 00622), John W. Toulopoulos Trustee of the Toulopoulos Realty Trust, et al. v. Lubavitch of Cambridge Inc. et al. (Land Court, Docket No. 24 Misc 000528), and Lubavitch of Cambridge, Inc. v. Cambridge Board of Zoning Appeal and City of Cambridge.
Convened in Executive Session 8:34pm-9:52pm 9-0; Placed on File 9-0
Keywords: (1) Vail Court, (2) Dover Amendment
Manager’s Agenda #4. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-24 regarding a critical drought status report. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Owen O’Riordan, Zusy; Placed on File 9-0
The entire report is quite interesting, but the current status is: On May 20th due to continued above average precipitation, the State Drought Task Force held a special mid-month meeting, and the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs downgraded the drought level for the Northeast region to Level 0-Normal.
Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the submission of the Zero Waste Master Plan. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, McGovern, Recycling Director Michael Orr, Zusy, Wilson, DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins, Simmons, Siddiqui; Placed on File 9-0
This is not just about recycling. The only comments I’ll make right now are that I’m still in the skeptical camp regarding rigid mandates and a possible Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) program for waste disposal, and that everyone should understand the difference between advocacy and implementation and public acceptability. Most of the people involved in producing this and other proposals are advocates. It is the job of elected representatives to weigh advocacy vs. public acceptability. The matter of separated bike lanes, loss of parking, and the rigidity of the current Cycling Safety Ordinance come to mind.
Getting Board & Commissioned
Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointments of Florrie Darwin, Scott Kyle, and Michael Rogove and the reappointments of Chandra Harrington, Joseph Ferrara, Elizabeth Lyster, Yuting Zhang, Gavin Kleespies, Paula Paris, and Kyle Sheffield to the Cambridge Historical Commission.
Charter Right – Sobrinho-Wheeler
Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment Sarah Holt, Emily Oldshue, and Ruth Webb and the reappointments of Marie-Pierre Dillenseger, Donna Marcantonio, and Peter Schur to the Half Crown-Marsh Neighborhood Conservation District Commission.
Charter Right – Nolan
Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Nondita Mehrotra, and the reappointments of Constantin von Wentzel, Heli Meltsner, McKelden Smith, Theresa Hamacher, and Freweyni Gebrehiwet to the Avon Hill Neighborhood Conservation District Commission.
Charter Right – Nolan
On The Table #4. That the City Manager is requested to explore with the Government Operations Committee whether the functions of the Peace Commission may be improved and enhanced by bringing them within another City Commission or Department, such as the Human Rights Commission, and report back in a timely manner. [Charter Right – Simmons, May 19, 2025; Tabled June 2, 2025]
Manager’s Agenda #14. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a revised draft of the “Eastern Cambridge Community Enhancements” Zoning Petition. text of report]
pulled by McGovern (along w/Committee Report #2); comments by McGovern, Nolan; Referred to Petition as Amended by Substitution 9-0; Placed on Unfinished Business 9-0
Committee Reports #2. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on May 20, 2025 to discuss two Zoning Petitions. The first Petition was by Mushla Marasao, et al. to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance in Sections 5.28.21, 8.22.1, 8.22.2, and Table 5.1. The second Petition was by BMR-320 Charles LLC c/o BioMed Realty, L.P. to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance in Article 20.000 with the intent to create a new overlay district called the East Cambridge Community Enhancement (ECCE) Overlay District. The Ordinance Committee voted favorably to forward the BioMed Realty Zoning Petition regarding the ECCE Overlay District, with proposed amendments from BioMed dated April 18, 2025, to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. [text of report]
pulled by McGovern along w/Manager’s Agenda #14; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0; Petition Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended 9-0
Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to determine whether the City Council can revoke an already approved curb cut application if said application was incomplete due to applicant failure. Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zusy
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy, Toner, McGovern, Azeem, Nolan, Simmons, City Solicitor Megan Bayer; Order Adopted 6-1-0-2 (Toner – No; Wilson, Simmons – Present)
One week the City Council is in near unanimity regarding delegating curb cut approvals to City staff, and now they want to know how and when they can rescind curb cuts. Go figure.
Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the City Clerk, the Information Technology Department, the Law Department, and any other relevant departments to draft an ordinance establishing the City of Cambridge Electronic Records Archiving Policy. Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Councillor Zusy
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy, McGovern, Simmons (shoutout to Barbara Carrera); Zusy added as sponsor 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0
This is important. Just like those old 8-track tapes, cassettes, vinyl records, and even CDs and DVDs become obsolete, the preservation of public records (often in perpetuity) needs to be addressed – especially in an historic city like Cambridge. There needs to be delegated custodians of these records and best practices for preservation, chain of custody, authenticity, integrity, and ease of public access. This is especially true in this age of electronic record-keeping.
Order #3. Policy Order urging Governor Healey, the MBTA Board of Directors and General Manager Phillip Eng to amend the MBTA Alewife Station Complex redevelopment RFP to include as a priority eliminating untreated Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) sewage in our neighborhoods by incorporating green and gray infrastructure as central components of the project. The order further calls on the MBTA to collaborate with the MWRA, DCR, DPH, the City of Cambridge, and the community to address this public health threat. Councillor Zusy, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Wilson [photos]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan w/concerns re: lack of specificity in Order – has a Substitute Order (not acted on); comments by DPW Commissioner Kathy Watkins w/concerns re: Order (98% reduction in CSO for Charles River, 85% CSO reduction in Alewife), notes extensive work by City – complex projects w/complex trade-offs, cost effectiveness, feasibility, Order is too prescriptive, notes plans for storage at Sherman St./Bellis Circle; Zusy comments; Amended (Zusy); Charter Right – Simmons
Note: Though I appreciate the intention of this Order, I have some questions about whether the proposed solutions violate the Laws of Physics.
Charter Right #1. That the exception language in Chapter 2.129.040 Section J of the Cambridge Municipal Code be revised with language clarifying that Cambridge city employees shall not participate in federal immigration enforcement operations and that the sole role of Cambridge city employees during any action by ICE is only to protect public safety and not to assist or facilitate the work of ICE. [Charter Right – Toner, June 2, 2025]
Comments by Toner, City Solicitor Megan Bayer (ICE agents not required to provide name or badge number), City Manager Yi-An Huang (ICE has been notifying local law enforcement), McGovern (add as sponsor), Wilson (add as sponsor), Zusy, Sobrinho-Wheeler (wants CPD to not do traffic enforcement or crowd control and only address public safety, refers to ICE arrests as “abductions”), Siddiqui, Nolan, Simmons (w/concerns about some of the directives in this Order, risk of escalation); [McGovern, Wilson added as sponsors 9-0]; Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-0-1 (Simmons – Present)
This is all well and good, but I have a hard time envisioning Cambridge Police aggressively challenging the actions of ICE employees, taking badge numbers, or doing anything other than simply keeping the peace in a delicate situation involving different law enforcement agencies.
Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant City departments to ensure that there is full open access for all users to Linear Park from Westley Avenue as an additional community access point. [Charter Right – Toner, June 2, 2025]
Comments by Toner, Nolan, Owen O’Riordan, Transportation Director Brooke McKenna, Sobrinho-Wheeler (w/absurd comparison with Brookline St.), Zusy (concerned about Linear Park being transformed into a “transportation corridor”), McGovern (w/amendment), Siddiqui, Azeem (if opening of gate proves problematic, can always close it again), Wilson (struggles w/lack of consistency of City Council); Amendment Adopted 9-0; comments by Simmons (Who would operate the gate every day?); Sobrinho-Wheeler curiously connects this matter to Multi-Family Housing issue, bristles at notion that single-family homes are being given favorable treatment; Order Adopted 5-4 as Amended (BA,MM,PN,SS,JSW – Yes; PT,AW,CZ,DS – No)
248 Communications – mainly calling for a STOP in the planned installation of separated bike lanes and massive loss of parking on Broadway.
The subtext of both of these matters is how to balance citywide and legislative priorities against legitimate local concerns. In recent years, the trend has been toward the former – often leading to the perception that city councillors and City staff don’t really listen to the residents of the city. That has increasingly become my perception, and that’s a real shame.
Up in Smoke
Unfinished Business #5. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk, relative to Chapter 5.50 CANNABIS BUSINESS PERMITTING. [Referred to Ordinance Committee Mar 17, 2025; Passed to 2nd Reading May 19, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained June 9, 2025] (ORD25#5)
pulled by McGovern; Ordained 9-0
Unfinished Business #6. An Ordinance has been received from City Clerk Diane P. LeBlanc, relative to Zoning Petition to remove the repackaging prohibition as a City Council Zoning Petition. [Passed to 2nd Reading May 19, 2025; Eligible To Be Ordained June 9, 2025] (ORD25#6)
pulled by McGovern; Ordained 9-0
Committee Reports #1. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public hearing on Friday, May 1, 2025 to discuss the 2025 City Manager’s Annual Goals and Review Process. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0
Like this:
Like Loading...
In Cambridge we like to tout our Proportional Representation (PR) election system as superior to other systems, and in many ways this is true. There is one question, however, that has been nagging at me for some time: “Proportional to what?” During the heyday of Cambridge rent control, it was pretty clearly the case that the City Council was in a similar proportion to the tenant-dominated electorate and that many, perhaps most, voters at that time were guided by that one dominant issue before considering any other issues or candidate traits. After the demise of rent control after Question 9 in 1994, the dominance of the rent control issue faded quickly and we entered a prolonged period where individual personalities and legacy affiliations guided local electoral choices. The notion of proportionality became more of a relic than anything else. In recent years, we have seen the rise of single-issue politics (density, subsidized housing, bike lanes, preservation), but identity politics is as much of a factor as any polarized issue. The question of “Proportional to what?” could not be muddier. What I find most aggravating is how single-issue advocates quote municipal election results to argue why their single issue is somehow reflective of the will of the electorate. There are so many confounding factors involved in voter choice that it is simply never valid to draw conclusions on issues that were not explicitly on the ballot.
This week’s agenda is dominated by several City Council Orders meant to address (or navigate around) the contentious issue of whether the proposed separated bicycle lanes, removal of most of the existing parking, and loss of curb access should proceed on Broadway as currently mandated by the Cycling Safety Ordinance. This is not really a matter of safety so much as political clout. Some straightforward analysis using the current registered voter list indicates that those who want the street reconfiguration to proceed as planned are approximately 25 years younger than those who have signed the petition opposing the reconfiguration. It is also anecdotally clear that there is also a large gap in socioeconomic status. Basically, young professionals are well-represented among those wanting to remove the parking, and those in opposition include far more seniors, people with mobility issues, and people who need their motor vehicles for work and chores.