Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

March 5, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 611-612: March 5, 2024

Episode 611 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 5, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Mar 5, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Super Tuesday; Iran voting boycott vs. campaign for “No Preference”; Trump vs. Biden; ward committees; City Council less dysfunctional, more collaborative w/City Manager; Finance Committee – levy projections, call for restraint, need to maintain excess levy capacity; use of operating budget for affordable housing has consequences; anticipated 10%+ annual increases in levy coming; fewer building permits – revenue not subject to Prop 2½ limits; commercial values relatively flat – shift of levy from commercial to residential; within residential, condos get sweetest deal after residential exemption and most of the increases borne by single-, two-, and three-family properties; need for intervention now to avoid future need for overrides; councillors had luxury for years in not having to think about limitations; FY24 consolidated spending categories; note that every stick of affordable housing (deed restrictions) has de minimis tax revenue – receive far more value in services that tax generated. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 612 – Cambridge InsideOut: Mar 5, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Mar 5, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Mar 4 City Council meeting; PERF report – police-involved shooting, good recommendations, positive evaluation of CPD practices, less-lethal options, CPD to be first in Mass. with policy on releasing names of involved officers; Central Square Lots Study in parallel with zoning changes; other assets, adjacent properties; everyone loves Central Square until they don’t; demise of current Starlight Square, need for replacement; contradictory signals on whether to gather more information or take action; exclusive focus on “affordable housing” creates net financial negative in perpetuity – math doesn’t work; plan in concert with privately-owned adjacent lots, e.g. Bishop Allen/Prospect, Green/Pleasant lot and Needle Exchange building; 44 years and 24 studies – the never-ending study of Central Square; not just about making everything bigger – need to make things better, more creative and more interesting; death of Paul Ryder; Charter Review update – next steps, desire to control process, facets of City government via Special Acts that should be part of Charter or at least be referenced – License Commission, Election Commission, Traffic Board, Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge Housing Authority, Cambridge Redevelopment Authority; housing-related orders re: real estate transfer tax and municipally-funded vouchers (a real budget buster); the more we fund affordable housing the wider the gap in affordability. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 21, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 609-610: February 20, 2024

Episode 609 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 20, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Feb 20, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Local News – Cambridge and beyond; Valentine’s Day – 46 years; City Council Goals & Objectives; the ordeal of facilitation and training; the value of informality and interaction in committee meetings; 311 vs. SeeClickFix vs. an Ombudsman vs. a simple phone call; benefiting from the existence of a problem; pros and cons of a good idea; upside-down priorities – the essential difference between a city manager and a strong mayor system. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 610 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 20, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Feb 20, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Ambiguity in affordable housing – buy vs. rent, market vs. subsidized; the DEI lens – one lens in addition to effectiveness, efficient delivery of services, and transparency; Envision – quote it when it suits you, ignore it when it doesn’t; the mythology of Central Square progress; Cycling Safety update – drawing conclusions from the inconclusive; Community Safety update – tiptoeing around the HEART problem; foreign policy or not; Charter Review Report gets political right out of the gate. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

February 14, 2024

Random Thoughts – February 14, 2024

Random Thoughts – February 14, 2024

In addition to the romanticism of Valentine’s Day, this day also marks the day I moved to the Cambridge/Boston area – 46 years ago. While this means that I can never be a True Cantabrigian, my consolation is that many lifelong Cambridge residents have adopted me as a kind of lost cousin. In fact, my move to Cambridge happened on the first day that buses were running from New York to Boston after the Blizzard of ’78, so it’s always easy for me to remember when I first washed up on the shores of the People’s Republic.RW

I spent a couple of hours yesterday attending a Special City Council meeting called for the purpose of updating the City Council Goals that were most recently updated over 5 years ago in October 2017. It’s likely that the statement of Guiding Principles and City Council Goals will change little, though perhaps they’ll get a bit more specific than the rosy generalities issued in 2017.

I have to say that I have never enjoyed meetings like this where participants stumble about trying to say something relevant that might get the attention of the facilitator. I will add that these exercises often seem more like justifications for keeping “facilitation companies” going than actually producing anything useful. I might say the same thing of most “team building” exercises and virtually all “trainings” – online or in-person. Especially in the context of elected officials who are endlessly competing for credit or attention, the notion that you can train competition into collaboration seems a bit naive. They’ll either do it or they won’t.

That said, there were a few moments of wisdom, reality, and perhaps even redefinition. For example, at least one councillor noted the difference between City Council orders and committee work. This is something I appreciate – over the years I have come to view many policy orders as “drive-by orders” where some random idea is tossed into the public arena or perhaps lifted from some other municipality. Committee work used to be more like a serious detailed discussion that welcomed public participation. That hasn’t really been the case in recent years – unless you are one of the privileged few who function more like “10th councillors” thanks to your affiliation with a lobbying group that also endorses candidates in the municipal election. Everyone else just gets their two or three minutes to make a short statement before being terminated by the Chair. I liked it better when if you actually offered constructive ideas at a committee meeting you might actually be involved in a back-and-forth discussion with the councillors. Nowadays you just perform and exit – unless you are among the politically privileged.

One suggestion made at yesterday’s meeting was that the City Manager and staff should send out weekly general updates of current topics being worked on by City staff. City Manager Yi-An Huang welcomed the idea but also expressed concern about “granularity” as he noted that at any given time there are ~2000 employees working on different things. Was the suggestion to have “weeklies” really be just about getting updates on the usual “hot topics” like bike lanes, BEUDO, and plans for recently-acquired City properties? It was also not made clear if these “weeklies” would be just for councillors or if they would be publicly available. Also unanswered was how such a protocol might mesh with the current daily updates to which many of us are subscribed.

One suggestion was that there should be a 311 system – a single point of contact for resident complaints and inquiries. This brought two things to mind. First, this sounds a lot like SeeClickFix – which is supposed to be the place for residents and elected officials alike to report problems. There seemed to be some sense that this system may not be functioning as well as it should be, and that when there is no response or action the calls go to city councillors. My experience has been that some kinds of SeeClickFix reports get an almost immediate response, and others languish for months or even years. It doesn’t help that some people view SeeClickFix as just another social media outlet on which they can bitch and moan about things that often go well beyond what the City can or should do. The other thing that came to mind was the proposal from over 20 years ago to create an Ombudsman Office that would respond to resident requests. That proposal went down in flames when councillors realized that responding to such complaints was an essential part of their political existence and that transferring that responsibility would only hurt their role in providing “constituent services”. In short, councillors often benefit from the existence of a problem.

Yesterday’s facilitator suggested that city councillors should be asking questions more than making statements. The response from some councillors was that this really doesn’t work in the context of a City Council meeting where you have to wait your turn to be recognized by the Chair and where technically all remarks are made through the Chair. I would note that in committee meetings this kind of questioning and back-and-forth conversation at least used to be common (and useful). It was also pointed out that the Open Meeting Law actually thwarts this kind of questioning and collaboration.

When the facilitators displayed their distillation of apparent City Council priorities (presumably based on some kind of questionnaire), the results were both predictable and misleading. The same can be said of the periodic Resident Surveys conducted on behalf of the City. Affordable housing always tops the list but rarely, if ever, is there any clarification of what that actually means. In one sense, it’s likely that 100% of residents want their housing to be affordable, but does that mean that they want to be able to buy a home on the open market at an affordable price, or does it mean that they want the City to subsidize the purchase? The same goes even more significantly when it comes to renting an apartment. I believe most renters simply want to see more affordable rents, and not necessarily that they want the City to subsidize those rents, but you would never know that from the Resident Survey or from the councillors’ prioritization.

It is worth noting that many, perhaps most, things that residents care about are not directly addressable by city councillors, the City administration, or from any level of government. Kindness, mutual respect, neighborliness, and voluntarism form the glue of society and likely have more to do with the satisfaction of living in a town or city than anything that was ever woven into a City Council policy order.

I was especially impressed when Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan noted that a major portion of City expenditures are in infrastructure, yet there was not even a mention of this in the list of City Council priorities. Perhaps this serves to highlight the difference between the politics of being an elected councillor and the management by City administration. Indeed, one of the greatest problems with a popularly-elected mayor as CEO is that it almost guarantees a greater share of attention and resources toward popular concerns and a corresponding decrease in focus on matters like infrastructure and municipal finance. I hope our current group of councillors keep this in mind as they debate possible Charter changes. It is, in fact, this focus on such matters by City management that allows the elected councillors to focus on more visible populist concerns.

Mayor Simmons bemoaned the fact that DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) was way down on the list of priorities, but stated that “this should be the lens through which we look at things.” It’s certainly one such lens, but fiscal responsibility, effective service delivery, responsiveness, and transparency are also pretty good lenses through which to look at and evaluate what we do as a city.

There was an interesting back-and-forth about the Envision plan and how it is often quoted or ignored depending on what you want or don’t want. There also continues to be a lot of misinterpretation of the goals and metrics in that report – especially in the area of housing.

Regarding Central Square, City Manager Huang stated that many of the goals contained in past studies have already been implemented – noting, in particular, bike lanes and outdoor dining. In fact, there is little mention of bike lanes in these past studies (perhaps due to how long ago the studies were produced), and much of the outdoor dining came about not from past studies but as an emergency response to the Covid epidemic as a means of helping some local businesses to economically survive. Indeed, the only significant new developments in Central Square happened independently of past studies, e.g. the Mass & Main (Normandy/Twining) zoning petition. It is my understanding that some new zoning proposals may be forthcoming based, in part, on some of the considerations of the C2 Study (from over a decade ago), but we’ll have to see where that road leads. – Robert Winters

February 7, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 607-608: February 6, 2024

Episode 607 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 6, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Feb 6, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: Charles Fried and a Capitol tale; Peter Valentine archive; Mapping Black Cambridge; campaign finance wrap-up; Gaza capitulation and activist misbehavior; the long history of foreign policy at the Cambridge City Council; City gobbling up Central Square; what’s in store for ’24. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 608 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 6, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Feb 6, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Foreign policy; Charter Review Final Report – manager vs. mayor, voting age, non-citizen voting, even-year elections, citizen assemblies – a critique; dysfunction in how we involve residents in decision-making; City Council “finding itself”, coming to terms with prioritization; City Council committee appointments; fending off the socialists; smart ideas vs. unreasonable mandates; better ways to manage public meetings with less Zoom and more interaction. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

January 17, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 605-606: January 16, 2024

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]

January 2, 2024

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 603-604: January 2, 2024

Episode 603 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 2, 2024 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Jan 2, 2024 at 6:00pm. Topics: City Council and School Committee Inaugural Meetings – entertainment courtesy of PSL (Party for Socialism and Liberation); Mayor Denise Simmons; protests and groupthink; Simmons appointments guaranteed better than predecessor; Charter considerations pending; Resignation of Harvard President Claudine Gay and other Harvard observations; university presidents as fundraisers. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 604 – Cambridge InsideOut: Jan 2, 2024 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Jan 2, 2024 at 6:30pm. Topics: Globe article on Bernie Goldberg, Brookline Lunch; Charter Review Committee – horror of Zoom-only process, nothing binding, strong mayor vs. manager form, bad behavior of CRC member(s), voting age, non-citizen voting, term length, recall provisions, at-large PR elections, citizen assemblies, citizen petitions, citizen initiative petitions, late proposals rejected, policy order vs. “action” orders; some highlights/lowlights of 2022-23 City Council term. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

November 22, 2023

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 601-602: November 21, 2023

Episode 601 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 21, 2023 (Part 1)

This episode was recorded on Nov 21, 2023 at 6:00pm. Topics: Notable Passings: Teresa Neighbor, Gregg Moree, Kevin Glynn; a personal tale of candidacy, the politics of personal destruction, the lack of a viable local press, and “taking one for the team”; Gaza takes center stage; municipal election results – City Council and School Committee; election mechanics, configuration files, ballot data files; the problem of ballot order dependence and how to fix it. Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]


Episode 602 – Cambridge InsideOut: Nov 21, 2023 (Part 2)

This episode was recorded on Nov 21, 2023 at 6:30pm. Topics: Replacements in the event of a vacancy; The Comedy of Voting Errors; Ward/Precinct #1 Vote distribution; neighborhood bases of support; great disparity in voter turnout among precincts and disproportional representation; #2 Vote Distribution from the ballot data; Cost per #1 Vote; some history of proportional representation historically and in the United States and in Massachusetts; Question: Proportional to what? Host: Robert Winters [On YouTube] [audio]

[Materials used in these episodes]

November 6, 2023

Proportional Representation: The Silent Ballot Question – Nov 6, 2023 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Proportional Representation: The Silent Ballot Question – November 6, 2023 Cambridge City Council Agenda

Tomorrow’s municipal election may be about choosing 9 people out of 24 City Council candidates and choosing 6 people out of 11 School Committee candidates, but there’s also the unspoken ballot question of the efficacy of our proportional representation (PR) elections. Elsewhere in the USA in years past, cities that used PR for their local elections gave up that election method when it yielded perverse results – either real or received. New York City quit using PR after two Communists were elected back in the 1930s (the actual story is a bit more nuanced). Other cities gave it up because some felt it was too “complicated” – a point of view not shared by me, though I admit that explaining how the tabulation works can be a challenge. That said, the idea of ranking your approved candidates doesn’t seem very difficult to understand.Countdown

There is a possibility that this year’s election could produce perverse results, or (hopefully) it will yield a group of candidates who are both rational and representative of the people of Cambridge. [I am, of course, quite biased since I am also a candidate this year.] I have often jokingly referred to myself as “the junkyard dog of Plan E and PR” in that I could be counted on to defend our system against any unwarranted or wrongheaded criticism. There are points worthy of criticism and there are opportunities to make some positive changes, but I do have some serious concerns about the efforts by some to turn Cambridge into the worst kind of populist government. [These concerns are the main reason I chose to be a candidate this year.]

Anyway, we’ll either be heading over the cliff tomorrow or pulling back from the brink. We’ll know soon enough. Meanwhile, there is a City Council meeting on Election Eve – traditionally one of the shortest ones, but I suppose all it takes is one difficult councillor to ruin everyone’s evening – unless the exercise of the Charter Right puts an end to the mayhem. Here are the items I found interesting this week:

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report #23-61, regarding the demographic information of dues-paying members of the municipal golf course.
pulled by Zondervan; QZ wants City to continue to collect information on race, age, and gender; Adam Corbell response that any such data collection will be voluntary; PT was under belief that such demographic information was NOT being collected at golf course; ambiguous response from Corbett; PN notes that this was report only on demographics (and not on other aspects of original City Council Order); MM addresses women’s sports scholarships; Placed on File 9-0

Hopefully this will mark the end of the silliness initiated by Councillors Nolan, Carlone, Zondervan, and Azeem back in January 2022. On the other hand, doubling-down on dumb ideas is not uncommon these days in politics from the local level to the national level and beyond.


Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the Law Department and other relevant City departments and prepare a report regarding the efficacy of establishing a dual reporting system for the Director of Public Health, the process by which the City could establish by ordinance a Commissioner of Public Health who would report directly to the City Manager, and the reestablishment of a Health Policy Board. [Charter Right – Simmons, Oct 30, 2023]
Simmons explains her use of Charter Right, wants to tease this Order out regarding what it aims to achieve; DS wants to Table and/or send back to Health and Gov’t Operations Committees; AM says many of these questions were asked at committee meeting, says there will be additional meetings; PN notes that this Order asks only for additional information from Law Department; MM suggests removing clause re: hiring a consultant; DS says that getting information is OK but concerned about whether a consultant should be hired; PN,AM,SS have had conversations with former MM motion to delete 2nd “Ordered” passes 5-4 (BA,MM,DS,PT,SS-Yes; DC,AM,PN,QZ-No); Adopted as Amended 8-0-0-1 (DS-Present)

Committee Report #4. The Government Operations, Rules and Claims Committee and the Health and Environment Committee held a joint meeting on Tues, Oct 17, 2023, to discuss the relationship between the City and the Cambridge Health Alliance, the budget of the Public Health Department, and best ways to serve the community’s public health needs. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I can’t say for sure what this is all about, but my suspicion is that this is rooted in the desire on the part of several city councillors to gain more control over our local health care options. I will remind everyone that there were very good fiscal reasons to spin the Cambridge Hospital off with state legislation that established the Cambridge Health Alliance and to separate this out from the City’s Operating Budget. I am very curious what the actual motivation is here.


Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to more fully explore the Commonwealth’s recommendations from the Separated Bike Lane document, especially for all squares and along small business districts, schools, and key park entries, and with a focus also on the integration of pedestrian and biking infrastructure.   Councillor Carlone (PO23#202)
Adopted 9-0

I expect that Councillor Azeem may exercise his Charter Right on this one in order to give him time to ask Chris Cassa and others associated with the Cambridge Bike Safety group what he is allowed to think.

Order #2. That the City Manager be and is hereby requested to direct CDD, the Law Department and any other relevant Departments to review this citizens zoning petition and provide any recommendations in writing to the Ordinance Committee on Nov 29, 2023.   Councillor McGovern, Councillor Zondervan
Adopted 9-0

This concerns the Zoning Petition from Allene R. Pierson et al. relating to where Lodging Houses are permitted as-of-right and, presumably, how this relates to the proliferation of quasi-hotel uses (AirBnB) that have been gobbling up rental housing in Cambridge. If I misread this, please disabuse me of my interpretation.


Committee Report #1. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee met on May 5, 2022, to discuss municipal broadband. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #2. The Human Services Committee conducted a public hearing on June 16, 2022, to discuss the recent MBTA bus network redesign. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee conducted a public hearing on June 28, 2022, to discuss the recent MBTA bus network redesign. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Looking back in time at meetings held more than a year ago.


Committee Report #5. The Health and Environment Committee held a public meeting on Wed, Oct 25, 2023, to discuss, review, and evaluate the Zero Waste Master Plan and plan reports and updates, and to discuss possible ways to further reduce waste in Cambridge including exploring how the city might eliminate single-use plastics including but not limited to nips, bottled water, and utensils. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I would love to see these nuisance plastics go away, but sometimes I feel as though our City Council just doesn’t like small businesses when they take actions that cut into the very narrow margins that allow these businesses to simply exist. Has persuasion been tried? Must everything be a legal mandate? – Robert Winters

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress