City Council agenda

May 12, 2025
HTML   PDF
[Official Agenda]

Open Meeting Portal

Previous (regular) meeting
HTML   PDF
[Official Agenda]

All City Public Meetings

2025 Cambridge
Candidate Pages
(preliminary)

Calendar of 2025
Election-related events

2023 Cambridge
Candidate Pages

Local News Sources

Camberville & Beyond
(Boston Globe)

In Memory

Cambridge Ideas

These essays originally appeared in The Alewife in 2006-2007.

Cambridge Recycles

Information on
Home Composting
in Cambridge

Archive of all City Council and School Committee election results, 1941-2023 (PDF)

Boston City Council set to vote on move to ranked-choice voting system for local elections

May 14 – In what would be a radical overhaul of the way elections work in the city, the Boston City Council is scheduled to vote today on adopting a ranked-choice voting system, the Herald’s Gayla Cawley reports. The change would affect elections for mayor and City Council and would require approval from the state Legislature. — Boston Herald (via MASSter List)

Merry Month of May - May 12, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

The FY26 Budget Hearings are continuing, but here are the highlights for this week’s regular City Council meeting… comments and additional details to follow:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to technical corrections that should be made to the Floodplain Zoning text. (CM25#118) [text of report]
pulled by McGovern along with Committee Report #1; comments by Nolan, Zusy; text amended 9-0 per Committee Report #1; Passed to 2nd Reading as Amended 9-0; Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on Apr 30, 2025 to hold a public hearing on a Zoning Petition by the Cambridge City Council to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance in Article 5.000 and Section 20.70 with the intent of (1) replacing the Floodplain Overlay and Planning Board Special Permit with the Massachusetts model ordinance structure for permitting development in the flood plain through administrative review; (2) updating references to the most recent FEMA maps to maintain compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program; and (3) revising other parts of the Zoning Ordinance for internal consistency. The Committee voted favorably to accept the amendments and forward them to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. [text of report]
pulled early along with Manager’s Agenda #1; Report Accepted, Place on File 9-0

Order #1. That the City Manager is requested to meet with the leadership of the Harvard Square Business Association to discuss the proposal and to take the necessary steps to facilitate the release of $72,000 to fund the RFP development for the tunnel engineering study.   Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toner, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy, City Manager Huang re: cost considerations, Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan re: pedestrianizing a portion of Harvard Square and skepticism re: tunnel proposal, McGovern, Toner, Nolan, Azeem; Charter Right - Azeem

I saw some images and videos of the abandoned tunnel under Brattle Street several years ago. This is a very intriguing idea.

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to work with the School Department, the Department of Public Works, and other relevant departments to ensure that all city owned parking lots, with a focus on school complexes, including the still under construction parking at Tobin/Darby Vassal school complex, could be made available for after-hours use by residents.   Councillor Nolan, Councillor Toner, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Zusy, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan re: more general parking concerns; add Siddiqui, Zusy, Wilson as sponsors 9-0; Toner notes that this is a request, a hope - notes that parking used to be available in off hours; Simmons comments, proposed amendment adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

On the Table #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-22, regarding a request to work with the School Department, the Department of Public Works, and other relevant departments to open the publicly owned parking at the King Open/Cambridge Street Upper School Complex for either residential free parking or commercial parking opportunities during “off” hours. [Tabled – May 5, 2025]

Charter Right #1. The City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to develop a timeline for the next Inclusionary Housing Study, explore remedies to address the lack of housing starts and provide for consideration draft amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and explore other incentives to encourage developers to include affordable units beyond the requirement voluntarily. [Charter Right – Azeem, May 5, 2025]
Azeem amendment by substitution, McGovern amendment to change date from January 2026 to October 2025; late communication from Chris Cotter (Housing) re: Inclusionary Housing; Toner, Simmons comments; [Editor’s Note: Chris Cotter’s testimony – esp. re: amount of time required for “study”, failure to conduct study on schedule – seems evasive and less than sincere]; Azeem wants accelerated timeline, does not support lowering 20% inclusionary requirement; comments by Zusy, City Manager Huang (noting that lowering pct. would not legally require a study); Simmons comments; date change from Jan 2026 to Oct 2025 adopted 9-0; Nolan, Toner amendments noting (in part) that the required study was not done and a reminder that adjustments of IZ percentages for different project sizes was requested in Sept 2024; comments by Nolan, Toner, Zusy (noting possible reduction in housing demand due to federal policies), Cotter, Wilson, Huang; Azeem calls the question (to end discussion) - voted 9-0; Nolan, Toner amendments adopted 9-0; JSW comments - not in favor of any reductions, wants even higher required percentages for larger projects, use of AHT funds to subsidize; Substitute Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Late Communication #2. A communication was received from Director of Housing, Chris Cotter. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

The original Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (1998) made sense in that the mandate for subsidized units in projects of 10 or more units came with a density bonus plus one additional market-rate unit for every mandated “affordable” unit. The revised ordinance (2017) was politically driven and economically nonsensical. The City Council could now amend the ordinance to reflect current conditions and economic reality … or they can act politically and ensure that few new inclusionary housing units are ever built. Indeed, many of the inclusionary units that have come on line in recent years were ones that were hatched prior to the current ordinance. Municipal election years can confound good decision-making.

Charter Right #2. That the City Manager is requested to include in the FY26 Operating Budget a continued commitment to Emergency Housing Vouchers for Permanent Supportive Housing and Mixed Status Families, and the Transition Wellness Center, as well as allocate the necessary resources to establish a municipal successor to Rise Up Cambridge that builds on its mission of providing direct, dignified economic support to families. [Charter Right – Wilson, May 5, 2025]
Wilson proposes substitute Order; Wilson elaborates that substitute order calls for “allocation of at least 25 additional housing vouchers or $1 million, whichever is greater, that would be open to the 20 remaining residents at the Transitional Wellness Center who do not have a permanent housing placement in process and to other shelter residents in Cambridge; and to allocate funding for a successor program to Rise Up Cambridge as soon as possible”; comments by Wilson, McGovern; Ellen Semonoff reports that there are some beds available at 240 Albany Street for people in recovery, efforts now being made to find situations for all remaining TWC occupants; Nolan comments, proposed amendment to require report of scope and cost of any Rise Up successor program; comments by Yi-An Huang of projects now in pipeline by Affordable Housing Trust (AHT); comments by Zusy re: open-ended continuing costs associated with keeping TWC open, fact that an unlimited number of people will continue to come to Cambridge for our generous services, suggests greater support for 240 Albany St./Bay Cove rather than open-ended provision of vouchers; Toner asks if additional $1 million for vouchers is feasible; Yi-An Huang notes that vouchers would be specifically for those in transition to permanent supportive housing; Toner expresses concerns about wording of request to fund a successor to Rise Up program; McGovern elaborates on possible options for successor program, criteria for eligibility, implementation dates; Wilson addresses matter of a “benefit cliff” that could potentially trigger loss of MassHealth benefits, implementation timeline (hoping to have everything up and running by Jan 1, 2026); Siddiqui notes that getting this into FY2026 Budget may not be possible; Toner expresses concerns about operation of proposed program and where the money would be coming from; Yi-An Huang says there is a path to creating a successor program - challenge is resourcing, questions of scale of program, prioritization; JSW comments about ARPA, opening of shelters, would prefer to give vouchers to all residents of all shelters, calls Rise Up successor program critical; Zusy to vote No because City budget otherwise seeing cuts; Nolan amendment to Substitute Order Adopted 9-0; Substitute Order Adopted as Amended 8-1 (Zusy-No)

Some councillors must have not read the memo regarding the need for greater fiscal restraint for the time being. And, of course, municipal election years can confound good decision-making.

Charter Right #3. First floor retail policy order. [Charter Right – Zusy, May 5, 2025]
Toner offers additional amendment that the Order be referred to the Economic Development and University Relations Committee and the the Neighborhood and Long-Term Planning Committee for a hearing and discussion before being forwarded to the Ordinance Committee for deliberation; comments by Zusy about value of neighborhood retail; Nolan, JSW, Azeem comments; Amendment Adopted 8-0-1 (Wilson-Absent); Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (Wilson-Absent)

I live in a BA-1 zone (mixed residential/commercial), but I don’t think this would be advisable for all residential zones. It’s one thing to grandfather existing small retail establishments, but I wouldn’t necessarily want to open up all residential zone to ground floor retail. Besides, isn’t everyone aware of how many vacant retail spaces there are right now and the fact that a lot of retail is croaking?

Resolution #7. Resolution congratulating Diane LeBlanc on her Retirement.   Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Toner
pulled by Simmons for comments; additional comments by McGovern, Toner, Siddiqui, Azeem, Nolan, Zusy, Wilson, Sobrinho-Wheeler, City Council Assistant Naomie Stephen; standing ovation for Diane LeBlanc; comments by Diane LeBlanc w/appreciation and thanks to staff of City Clerk’s Office

Diane LeBlanc has been a blessing for the last three years. We are an historic city and it has been great to have someone with a background as an archivist in the role of City Clerk.

Committee Report #2. The Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee held a public hearing on May 5, 2025 to initiate the process of re-appointing the City Auditor, PO25#62. The Committee voted favorably to forward the re-appointment of the City Auditor, Joseph McCann, to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. [text of report]
pulled by McGovern; Joseph McCann reappointed to another 3-year term as City Auditor 9-0; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Comments?

Members Sought for Cambridge’s Council on Aging Board

May 12, 2025 – The Cambridge Council on Aging (COA) is seeking interested individuals to serve on its board to help advocate for important issues impacting older adults (residents ages 60 and older).

The purpose of the COA board is to:

Promote and encourage existing and new services and activities intended to enhance and improve the quality of life of older persons in the city; Advise the City Manager on all matters pertaining to the welfare of older adults who live in Cambridge ; Advocate for older adults in Cambridge . Board members also support COA/ Senior Center staff with community outreach for services, benefits, activities and programs available to older adults.

Applicants must be Cambridge residents, age 60 or older. The City of Cambridge is committed to advancing a culture of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Committee members 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.

The Council on Aging meets virtually via the Zoom platform on the 2nd Tuesday of the month, 9:30-11am.

For more information about the Council on Aging, please contact Susan Pacheco, Executive Director of the Council on Aging at 617-349-6220 or at spacheco@cambridgema.gov.

The deadline for submitting applications is Monday, June 16, 2025. Applications can be submitted using the City’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/Apply. A cover letter and resume, or an overview of relevant experience, can also be submitted during the online application process. Paper applications are also available in the City Manager’s Office at Cambridge City Hall, 795 Massachusetts Avenue.

Volunteer Opportunities - Cambridge Boards & Commissions (click for details)

Cambridge Housing Authority Board - deadline Mon, May 12, 2025

Cambridge Commercial Parking Control Committee - deadline Mon, June 2, 2025

Cambridge Public Planting Committee - deadline Mon, June 2, 2025

Cambridge’s Council on Aging Board - deadline Mon, June 16, 2025

Cinco de Mayo - May 5, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

Here are the featured items this week. I’ll offer minimal comments for now - summaries to follow after the meeting.

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a Federal update.
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang on executive order re: sanctuary cities, federal grant agreements (esp. HUD grants), federal budget w/significant cuts to programs; creation of federal funding stabilization fund, executive actions outpacing legal/court responses, expected steep cuts, proposed elimination of entire CDBG program, housing eligibility; JSL asks about how these interact with Cambridge budget process; Nolan notes loss of coastal resiliency funding; Zusy asks why are waiting to reduce budget until FY27, Manager notes that City is making some adjustments now, Zusy suggests making some judicious cuts now; Manager notes that City has contingency plans, won’t sign on to Trump mandates, expected legal challenges, possible funding losses; Zusy asks about Free Cash status and prognosis, concerns about depleting cash reserves in order to fund various requests; Azeem - suspend rules to take up Order #6; City Manager says he understands intention behind Order #6 but we cannot do everything and must remain fiscally responsible, will provide more detailed responses during Budget Hearings, TWC response already provided, Rise Up successor planning to follow for FY27 and not FY26, prioritization of major proposals now underway; Placed on File 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #2. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 24-14, regarding a home rule petition allowing Cambridge to end the practice of property owners passing on broker’s fees to tenants. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; Home Rule Petition Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-22, regarding a request to work with the School Department, the Department of Public Works, and other relevant departments to open the publicly owned parking at the King Open/Cambridge Street Upper School Complex for either residential free parking or commercial parking opportunities during “off” hours.
pulled by Nolan; Nolan comments; Deputy City Manager Owen O’Riordan notes that this is still before the Buildings & Grounds Subcommittee of the School Committee; Wilson, McGovern, Zusy, Azeem comments; Yi-An Huang notes that current garage not designed for public use, possibility of converting it while preserving school safety; Simmons explains status as Chair of School Committee; Tabled 8-0-1 (Zusy Absent)

Manager’s Agenda #6. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Subandha Karmacharya as a member of the Commission on Immigrant Rights and Citizenship for a term of three years.
Appointment Confirmed 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appointment of Carolyn Zern as a member of the Planning Board for a term of five years.
pulled by Zusy (asking about term lengths of boards); explanations by Melissa Peters (CDD), Mayor Simmons; Appointment Confirmed 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the Planning Board recommendation on the AHO Heights Zoning Petition.
Referred to Petition 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #9. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the prioritization of zoning priorities. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; comments by Nolan, Zusy; responses by Melissa Peters (CDD); Placed on File 9-0

Order #1. City Council support of the completion of the Mass Central Rail Trail.   Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Nolan to be added as sponsor; comments by Zusy; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

I go back a long way on this one and on other rails-to-trails projects. Back in the 1980s I rode/walked along the route of what would eventually become the Minuteman Bikeway with a lead person from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC). [Andy and I also played on the same Boston Junior Park League baseball team.] I was also tasked along with two other bicycle advocates to chart out the markings and intersections along the entire route of the Minuteman Bikeway, and I witnessed all stages of its construction. In the early 1990s, my friend David Goode was tasked by the Mass. Department of Environmental Management (now folded into the DCR) to research the available right-of-way of the Mass Central Railroad west of Route 495, especially around Berlin, MA west to the Wachusetts Reservoir in Clinton, MA. I purchased a hybrid bike for this purpose - the same bike that I use today - so that David and I could explore the route. So we loaded the bikes into my old VW Bus and we headed west. We not only explored the section of the RR right-of-way built after the Wachusett Dam forced a change in the route, but also the original right-of-way that had gone back to nature. That was an adventure. The culmination of our exploration was at the reservoir where we scrambled up a hillside and found the long-abandoned Clinton Tunnel through which westbound trains once passed before immediately finding themselves on the highest wooden trestle in New England as they passed over the South Nashua River below the dam. It was great fun going through the Clinton Tunnel on our bikes, and I have returned on several occasions.

Many sections of what is now the Mass Central Rail Trail, including most of the section through Weston which originally faced strong local opposition, have now been built. I attended some of those meetings in Weston 30 years ago. There are trade-offs between having a more primitive, unimproved right-of-way vs. a paved bikeway, and I could understand and appreciate the differing points of view. On balance, the Mass Central Rail Trail continues to be a great long-term project as it wends its way toward a greater degree of completion.

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to work with relevant staff to investigate bike pod storage options to be placed in suitable areas in the City to provide residents and visitors safe storage options.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Siddiqui, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; comments by JSW; Toner, Zusy, Nolan comments - issues of how to add these w/o negative impacts, nontrivial cost; Simmons amendment to analyze cost adopted 9-0; Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

Order #4. That the City Manager is requested to prepare an update with details on the status of potential civilian flagger operations in the Cambridge police union contract and work with relevant city staff to explore a civilian traffic flagger program and update the current police union contract on the City’s website.   Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Azeem, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Siddiqui
pulled by Toner; comments by JSW, Toner (noting that active police officers, retired officers, officers from other communities, and only then civilian flaggers; City gets 10% of the fee), Zusy ($64.50/hour and a 4 hour minimum), Nolan; Order Adopted 9-0

This order is just an echo of similar orders from years past. I saw primarily civilian flaggers during my various cross-country trips. In Massachusetts, every time the idea is suggested it has been met with anecdotes about how a uniformed police flagger foiled a crime and why this “proves” the need to have only uniformed officers doing this job. This is total nonsense. It’s the same sort of protectionism that has kept requirements for lucrative police details in many situations where any competent person could do the job.

Order #5. The City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to develop a timeline for the next Inclusionary Housing Study, explore remedies to address the lack of housing starts and provide for consideration draft amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and explore other incentives to encourage developers to include affordable units beyond the requirement voluntarily.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Toner; comments by Toner, Nolan; City Manager acknowledges the economics; Melissa Peters (CDD) notes that IZ has been main driver of affordable units; Azeem comments - notes that an 8% inclusionary requirement might pencil out, higher percentages currently infeasible; McGovern asks how long the analysis would take, Melissa reports from Chris Cotter an estimate of 9 months; McGovern recounts history of how current requirement would come to be and the 5-year review has not been done, still believes that AHO will surpass production of IZ, notes political perceptions of making any changes; JSW opposes lowering of 20% requirement as well as quick implementation of any changes, suggests tiered requirements; Siddiqui comments; Zusy supports intention of this Order, agrees with adopting a temporary reduction in mandate pending detailed study, notes dearth of new Inclusionary units over last 3 years - though contradicted by numbers in Budget Book and elsewhere; Melissa Peters notes distinction between issuance of building permits and actual construction; Toner reiterates that 5-year study now overdue; Zusy asks to be added as co-sponsor of original Order; Substitute Order by Azeem, JSW, Siddiqui, McGovern; Wilson comments (wants to use Affordable Housing Trust to subsidize IZ), Manager responds that it may be possible; Nolan comments, including whether a seeking a variance is a possibility, Melissa Peters suggests this would not qualify as a hardship; McGovern suggests changing reporting date on substitute amendment from January 2026 to October 2025; Charter Right - Azeem

Please read the letter from Patrick Barrett on this topic. City Council initiatives are often more performative than practical.

Order #6. That the City Manager is requested to include in the FY26 Operating Budget a continued commitment to Emergency Housing Vouchers for Permanent Supportive Housing and Mixed Status Families, and the Transition Wellness Center, as well as allocate the necessary resources to establish a municipal successor to Rise Up Cambridge that builds on its mission of providing direct, dignified economic support to families.   Councillor Wilson, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Siddiqui, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler
Voted along with City Manager #1; Simmons substitute language for Order #6; McGovern wants to spend down Free Cash and raises property taxes to fund the DSA-recommended wish list of additional programs and extension of existing programs set to expire; Wilson also wants to spend down Free Cash and raise taxes to fund the DSA-recommended wish list; JSW also wants to spend down Free Cash and raise taxes to fund the DSA-recommended wish list; Siddiqui also wants to spend down Free Cash and raise taxes to fund the DSA-recommended wish list - especially the Rise Up local welfare program; Toner objects to references to “the unelected City Manager” who is hired by the elected City Council, notes that Council voted 8-1 to maintain city manager form of government, 9-0 to extend City Manager’s contract, recalls discussions over this past year in Finance Committee re: fiscal restraint, notes that Rise Up was funded by ARPA and not from property taxes, City Manager has been clear along about the greater wisdom in closing the ARPA-funded Transition Wellness Center in favor of better alternatives, will support substitute Order, need more time to structure any possible Rise Up successor, not the right time to be funding new programs; Nolan notes that City Council and City Administration has pushed back hard on federal actions, City Manager has stood firmly in support of community values, would prefer to find efficiencies in existing budget to fund emergency measures, notes large residential property tax increases in recent years and that this also affects rents; Zusy calls programs commendable but we don’t have the funds to continue them all, willing to seek efficiencies in order to free up some funding; Simmons notes that leadership requires difficult choices, asks Council to support substitute amendment to Order #6; Azeem notes that he initially voted to find more $ to support TWC but that this has led to additional demands to fund many other things, and we don’t have unlimited capacity to fund all these things, do support municipal voucher initiative, calls Rise Up program very effective, wants City Council orders to be respected and feels that current City Manager follows City Council orders more than his predecessors; McGovern reiterates that we have enough money from Free Cash to fund everything; Simmons Substitution Adopted 5-4 (BA,PN,PT,CZ,DS-Yes; MM,SS,JSW,AW-No); Wilson Charter Right on Substitute Order

Committee Report #2. The Human Services and Veterans Committee held a public hearing on April 17, 2025 to discuss the feasibility of a successor program to Rise Up. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

While I cannot say for sure, this policy order has a distinct quality of a municipal election year rallying device. All of its sponsors have attended Finance Committee meetings regarding the questionable feasibility and advisability of these programs, and it seems like a combination of ignorance and arrogance to continue to insist that these all be funded. ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act of 2021) was a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus bill passed by Congress to aid in recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. It was never intended to be a permanent addition to the operating budgets of cities and states that accepted ARPA funding. The key word in “Transition Wellness Center” is “Transition” - indicative of a short-term accommodation to reduce shelter occupancies during the worst period of the COVID epidemic. The “Rise Up Cambridge” local welfare program was also principally funded by ARPA, and any successor program would have to be more limited and with stricter eligibility requirements. [Needless to say, welfare programs are best funded through the state and federal government rather than as individual municipal programs.] Emergency housing vouchers in response to major changes in federal housing policies and funding seem like an appropriate conversation in the moment, but any notion that the City can simply take on all of these costs and burdens is woefully naive.

It is noteworthy that the Cambridge Democratic City Committee (CDCC) has signed on as a sponsor of a rally scheduled to coincide with the City Council meeting. I am a member of the CDCC (Ward 6) and I don’t recall there being any mention of this anywhere or any vote to endorse these proposed measures. Then again, the CDCC - much like so many political organizations - is prone to acting as an extension of a small number of activists who have inserted themselves as principal decision-makers who feel little or no need to consult their membership.

Order #7. First floor retail policy order.   Councillor Azeem, Vice Mayor McGovern, Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson
pulled by Toner; amendments proposed by Toner, Nolan; comments by Azeem, McGovern, Zusy, Siddiqui; Melissa Peters responds; Nolan amendment Fails 4-4-1 (PN,SS,JSW,DS-Yes; MM,PT,AW,CZ-No; Present-BA]; Melissa Peters explains options for amendment to zoning; Zusy concerns re: “other appropriate areas of the city”; Toner explains the intention of the Order; JSW says he would welcome retail or restaurant next door without any qualifications; Zusy notes what was done in Somerville; Charter Right - Zusy

Neighborhood-scale retail is a great amenity, but I don’t think it would make sense or be welcome at all locations in all residential districts. This is why zones such as the BA-1 and BA-2 zones were created - to permit these uses in locations where they already existed and where they can coexist with neighbors. I know - I live in a BA-1 zone.

Resolution #14. Resolution on the death of Doane Perry.   Councillor Nolan

Doane was a jewel of a human being. Doane also served for a time as President of the Mid-Cambridge Neighborhood Association (MCNA). I have enduring respect for all of the people who have assumed the burden of heading up a neighborhood association and taken on the often-difficult task of developing consensus from a broad range of differing opinions.

Committee Report #1. The Human Services and Veterans Committee held a public hearing on April 10, 2025 to discuss services being provided to the unhoused community and an update on the opioid settlement. [text of report]
pulled by Zusy for minor amendment (pg 3); Report Accepted as Amended, Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Ordinance Committee held a public hearing on April 29, 2025 on a Zoning Petition by the Cambridge City Council to amend the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance in Article 11.000 with the intent to amend certain subsections of the Affordable Housing Overlay, Section 11.207 of the Cambridge Zoning Ordinance, with the intent of limiting allowable height increases in Residence C-1 districts, removing references to provisions in the base zoning that are no longer applicable, and clarifying references to departments responsible for enforcement. The Ordinance Committee voted favorably to accept the amendments and forward them to the full City Council with a favorable recommendation. [text of report]
pulled by McGovern; Zoning Petition Amended 9-0; Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Note: The FY2026 Budget Hearings start this week.

Comments?

Urgent Legal and Policy Concerns Regarding Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance - a letter from Patrick Barrett

Date: May 1, 2025

City Manager Yi-An Huang
Mayor E. Denise Simmons
Members of the Cambridge City Council
City Hall
795 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139

Subject: Urgent Legal and Policy Concerns Regarding Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (Section 11.203)

Dear City Manager Huang, Mayor Simmons, and Honorable Members of the City Council,

I write to highlight critical legal and economic flaws in Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (Section 11.203), which mandates that 20% of residential floor area in developments with 10 or more units be dedicated to affordable units. While the City’s affordability goals are laudable, the ordinance’s non-compliance with state law, reliance on outdated economic assumptions, failure to meet procedural mandates, and disproportionate impact on smaller developers demand immediate action. Specifically, I address: (1) non-compliance with the MBTA Communities Act; (2) failure to conduct a required nexus study by April 2022; (3) reliance on the outdated 2016 David Paul Rosen & Associates report amidst changed economic conditions; and (4) legal vulnerabilities under recent judicial precedents.

1. Non-Compliance with the MBTA Communities Act
The MBTA Communities Act (M.G.L. c. 40A, § 3A), enacted in January 2021, requires MBTA communities like Cambridge to establish a zoning district of reasonable size allowing multi-family housing as-of-right with a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre, located within 0.5 miles of a transit station, without age restrictions and suitable for families. Cambridge, as a rapid-transit community, was required to submit a compliant zoning ordinance to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC) by December 31, 2023. We have been certified compliant however we are not in compliance with our own zoning requirements and lack a valid economic feasibility analysis (EFA). This opens the question of the validity of certification and what if any standards are being met in certification. If Cambridge is to be an example to other towns currently fighting the MBTA Communities Act we must, at a bare minimum, be in compliance with our own laws. Further the 2025 Multifamily Housing Zoning Amendment eliminated most of the “bonus” density awarded to inclusionary projects as a financial offset. This was done without a corresponding nexus study which would have been required to show the impact of removing bonuses anticipated by the Rosen report.

The February 2025 zoning reform, allowing multi-family housing citywide up to four stories (six stories for inclusionary projects on lots ≥5,000 sq ft), aligns with Section 3A’s density and as-of-right requirements. However, the 20% affordability requirement exceeds EOHLC guidelines, which permit up to 10% of units at 80% Area Median Income (AMI) without an economic feasibility analysis (EFA). Higher percentages, up to 20%, require an EFA demonstrating financial viability. Cambridge’s blanket 20% requirement, applied citywide without a recent EFA, is not in compliance, as it clearly does render projects economically infeasible without significant cross collateralization as seen in 121 Broadway, and is particularly onerous given rising costs since 2016.

2. Failure to Conduct a Required Nexus Study (Section 11.203.2(c))
Section 11.203.2(c) mandates that the City “initiate a reevaluation of the Inclusionary Housing Requirement at an interval of no more than five (5) years” to assess the percentage of affordable units, income eligibility, and program effectiveness. The ordinance was amended in April 2017, increasing the requirement from 15% to 20% based on the 2016 Rosen report. The first reevaluation was due by April 2022.

No evidence indicates a comprehensive reevaluation occurred. The 2018 Inclusionary Housing Report, documenting 258 units completed or under construction, is a progress update, not a nexus study. The Community Development Department’s (CDD) ongoing monitoring (1,200+ units since 1998) and the 2025 reform do not fulfill Section 11.203.2(c)’s mandate. This procedural failure undermines the ordinance’s legitimacy, as the City cannot justify the 20% rate’s proportionality under Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (2024), which requires legislative exactions to be tailored to project-specific impacts. Non-compliance suggests arbitrary policymaking, exposing the ordinance to legal challenges.

3. Outdated 2016 Rosen Report and Changed Economic Conditions
The 2016 David Paul Rosen & Associates report recommended increasing the inclusionary requirement to 20%, contingent on four conditions to ensure economic feasibility. The report’s economic assumptions are outdated due to significant changes by 2025 in interest rates, land costs, construction costs, utility costs, capitalization rates (cap rates), and new zoning regulations not anticipated in 2016. Most conditions remain unmet, exacerbating the ordinance’s adverse impact, particularly on smaller-scale projects of 10 or more units.

Analysis of the Rosen Report

• Interest Rate: The report assumed a blended interest rate of 4.5–5.0% for construction and permanent loans reflecting 2016 market conditions. By 2025, interest rates have risen to 8.5–10.8%, increasing debt costs.

• Land Cost per Unit: The report estimated residual land costs at $50,000–$170,000 per unit for multi-family developments (6–300 units), with smaller projects at higher costs (~$150,000–$170,000) and larger ones at lower costs (~$50,000–$80,000). By 2025, land costs have escalated to $150,000–$250,000 per unit (47–200% increase), requiring ~$200,000/year additional NOI at a 5.0% cap rate, unfeasible without higher rents or incentives.

o Disproportionate Impact: Smaller-scale projects of 10 or more units but under 200 face greater economic barriers under the 20% inclusionary mandate compared to larger or incentivized projects permitted under the 15% mandate (December 2016–June 2017), such as 425 Mass Ave & 47 Bishop Allen Drive (completed 2018 by Twining Properties), 195-211 Concord Turnpike (completed 2018 by Bozzuto Group), and more recent projects like 121 Broadway which levered outstanding commitments, increased density, and funding from the CRA. Market Central, including 47 Bishop Allen Drive, leveraged a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) granting ground floor area exemptions, an FAR increase to 6.5, a special overlay re-mapping, and height increases to 195 feet from by-right 55 feet and special permit 80 feet, enabling affordability via retail (15,400 sq ft) and residential revenue (Link, Watermark). Atmark Cambridge used mixed-use revenue (retail). Smaller projects lack such advantages, facing:

• High Land Costs: ~$200,000–$250,000 per unit (47–200% higher than 2016), increasing financial burdens.

• Rising Construction Costs: Up 50-60% since 2016, straining budgets for projects without economies of scale.

• New Zoning Costs: Article 22 (2018, amended 2023), tree protection (2019), and climate resilience (2021) add 10–25% to costs ($1.5M–$12M for 50,000 sq ft).

• Removal of Density Bonus: The 2025 six-story bonus for lots ≥5,000 sq ft is absent in high-density zones (e.g., Central Square) or insufficient to offset 20% mandate costs without density bonuses.

• Permitting Delays: Community meetings (Footnote 37) and environmental reviews add $20,000–$50,000, disproportionate for smaller developers. As-of-Right projects subject to Article 19.50 averaging roughly 7-12 months and 11 – 20 months if a 19.23 special permit is required.

• Construction Costs: The report assumed stable prices (~$200–$300/sq ft). By 2025, costs have risen nearly 40% due to supply chain issues, labor shortages, and inflation.

• Utility Costs: The report implied 2016 utility costs. In 2025, costs have risen significantly, reducing NOI:

o Electricity: Up 38% (22.5 to 31 ¢/kWh), increasing monthly costs by $150/unit, reducing NOI by $14,688/year for 12 units.

o Natural Gas: Up 67% ($1.50 to $2.50/therm), reducing NOI by $14,400/year for 12 units.

o Heating Oil: Up 52% ($2.70 to $4.10/gallon), reducing NOI by $10,800/year for 12 units.

For a 12-unit project, a $39,888 NOI drop lowers value by ~$864,000 at a 5.0% cap rate, hitting smaller projects harder.

• Cap Rate Comparison: The report implied cap rates of 4.5–5.0% (Class A/B) and 5.0–5.5% (Class C). In 2025, cap rates are 4.8–5.3% (Class A/B) and 5.3–5.8% (Class C, CBRE), driven by higher interest rates and costs. A $1M NOI project at 4.5% (2016) yields $22.22M, but at 5.0% with $43,200 NOI drop (2025), yields $19.12M—a 14% valuation drop, worse for smaller projects with higher effective cap rates (~5.5%).

Additional Post-2016 Zoning Changes
Since 2016, Cambridge adopted regulations not anticipated in the Rosen Report, increasing costs:

• Article 22 - Sustainable Design and Development (2018, amended 2023): Mandates LEED certification and net-zero readiness for projects over 25,000 sq ft, adding 10–25% to costs ($6M–$12M for 50,000 sq ft per BXP reports) and $10,000–$50,000+ in application delays not including costs to carry.

• Tree Protection Ordinance Enhancements (2019): Requires tree permits ($100–$500/tree) and replacements ($500–$1,500/tree), adding $5,000–$20,000 and $10,000–$30,000 in delays.

• Climate Resilience Requirements (2021): Mandates flood-resistant designs, adding 5–15% to costs ($1.5M–$5M for 50,000 sq ft) and $20,000–$50,000 in delays.

• Elimination of Minimum Parking Requirements (2022): Saves $500k–$2.5M by removing $50,000–$100,000/space, but most for sale condo buildings seek to add parking not remove it thus the bonus only truly applies in a rental scenario.

These changes increase costs by 10–25%, offsetting parking savings and rendering the 20% mandate unfeasible for smaller projects without density bonuses.

Four Conditions for Raising Inclusionary Requirement Outlined In Rosen
The Rosen report outlined four conditions to support the 20% requirement:

1. Increased Density Bonuses: Recommended citywide FAR bonuses.

o 2025 Relevance: Not Met. The 2025 six-story bonus (lots ≥5,000 sq ft) is limited or absent in high-density zones, unlike Market Central’s PUD concessions. Removing density bonuses further undermines feasibility, likely requiring a new nexus study and opening to challenge the current ordinance.

2. Flexible Requirements for Smaller Projects: Suggested tiered percentages (e.g., 10–15% for <20 units).

o 2025 Relevance: Not Met. The 20% mandate is uniform, deterring smaller projects. It is not clear that 10% works for smaller projects (10 – 20 units) based 2025 conditions.

3. Streamlined Permitting Processes: Advocated faster permitting.

o 2025 Relevance: Partially Met. As-of-right zoning and parking elimination help, but community meetings (footnote 37), special permits through Article 19, Small Project Review in Article 19.50, environmental reviews, and traffic and parking mitigation add massive delays.

4. Periodic Reevaluation: Required reassessments every five years.

o 2025 Relevance: Not Met. No 2022 reevaluation occurred, leaving the 20% rate unadjusted despite cost escalations, removal of bonuses, and passage of the MBTA Communities Act.

The unmet conditions and outdated assumptions (4.5–5.0% interest rate vs. 8.5–10.8%, $50,000–$170,000 vs. $150,000–$250,000 land cost, 40% construction cost increase, 20–136% utility cost increases, 4.5–5.0% vs. 4.8–5.3% cap rates) make the 20% mandate infeasible for smaller projects, especially without density bonuses.

4. Legal Vulnerabilities

The ordinance faces legal risks:

• Unconstitutional Takings: The 20% mandate lacks proportionality, failing the Nollan/Dolan/Sheetz test, relying on the outdated 2016 Rosen report without a 2022 nexus study. Removing density bonuses would exacerbate this by increasing the exaction’s burden without justified impact assessments, risking due process violations.

• MBTA Communities Act: The 20% requirement exceeds EOHLC guidelines (10% without EFA, 20% with EFA). Without bonuses, a new EFA is needed to prove feasibility, or the ordinance risks non-compliance with Section 3A.

5. Recommendations

To address these flaws, I urge the City to:

1. Reduce the Inclusionary Housing Requirement: Lower to 10% without an EFA to comply with M.G.L. c. 40A, § 3A as an emergency measure for the next three years.

2. Initiate a Nollan/Dolan/Sheetz-Compliant Study: Conduct a nexus study per Section 11.203.2(c) to justify exactions. Require CDD act immediately and limit time to completion.

3. Explore Returning Development Bonuses: Direct the Cambridge Community Development Department to create bonuses that anticipate the 2025 multifamily housing change including but not limited to fast tract permitting, removing Article 19, scaling inclusionary with tailored nexus studies per Sheetz, and any other potential bonus to offset the exorbitant burden IZ zoning places on residential development.

Cambridge’s housing leadership is commendable, but the ordinance’s flaws undermine its effectiveness and legality. Please work to rapidly address the issues raised herein to address the urgency of the housing crisis we are in and to ensure we do not further encumber ourselves with ineffective counterproductive regulations.

Sincerely,
Patrick W. Barrett III

Comments?

Fall from Grace - Former City Councillor Nadeem Mazen Arrested
Charged with Kidnapping, Witness Intimidation, Malicious Destruction of Property, Assault & Battery

Apr 30, 2025 – According to police reports, former Cambridge City Councillor Nadeem Mazen was arrested on April 16, 2025 and charged with 4 counts: (1) kidnapping, (2) witness intimidation, (3) malicious destruction of property, and (4) assault & battery. When police arrived on the scene, Mazen was observed climbing a fence to restricted area, bleeding from an open laceration of his hand, his clothing was ripped, he was foaming at the mouth, and was very paranoid and agitated.

The charges stem from an incident that took place at the Holiday Inn Express Hotel in East Cambridge in which a woman known to Mazen was allegedly locked in a bathroom and her cell phone taken by Mazen who appeared to be high on cocaine and ketamine at the time of the incident. When the woman attempted to call the police, Mazen allegedly grabbed the hotel phone and threw it at the hotel window breaking the glass. Mazen allegedly attempted to prevent the woman from escaping, but she was able to reach hotel staff who called the police. Upon arrest, Mazen was reportedly highly agitated and had to be sedated after police placed him on a stretcher to be transported to the hospital.

All persons are presumed innocent until such time as a court of law determines otherwise.

Mazen was first elected to the Cambridge City Council in 2013 and served two terms (2014-2017). In November 2015 he co-founded Jetpac, Inc. that “helps rising underrepresented leaders to build movements, organize communities, and drive positive social change.” He also has maintained his Nimblebot company since 2008, a “boutique creative agency with an exciting portfolio of software, design, and viral projects.” He is a graduate of Phillips Academy and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Members Sought for Cambridge’s Public Planting Committee

Apr 30, 2025 – Cambridge City Manager Yi-An Huang is seeking Cambridge residents interested in serving on the City’s Public Planting Committee.

The Public Planting Committee is charged with the responsibility of promoting and improving the quality and diversity of plantings throughout all areas of Cambridge. This includes reviewing planting plans for new public work in the city; advising the city on effective maintenance of public plantings; supporting the role of the Urban Forestry Division of the Cambridge Public Works Department; and encouraging interest in public plantings in all neighborhoods.

Committee members are appointed to 2-year terms. Candidates should be Cambridge residents who have an interest in urban forestry and landscape issues, and, ideally, experience in horticulture.

The City of Cambridge is committed to advancing a culture of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Committee members must also 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.

The Committee holds a hybrid meeting on the second Wednesday of each month, from 5:30-7pm, at the Department of Public Works, 147 Hampshire Street, Frazier Building Conference Room, Cambridge. Committee members and the public can also attend virtually.

Applications to serve on this committee can be submitted by Monday, June 2, 2025 using the City’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/Apply. A cover letter and résumé or applicable experience can be submitted during the online application process.

For more information about the committee, contact David Lefcourt, City Arborist, at 617-349-6433 or dlefcourt@cambridgema.gov.

Budget Season - April 28, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting

This week brings the FY2026 Budget with the Budget Hearings to commence next week. Here are the items of special interest this week:

The Budget and the Loan Orders

Manager’s Agenda #2. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the FY2026 submitted budget and appropriation orders for the General Fund, Water Fund, and Public Investment Fund. [text of report]
pulled by Nolan; Nolan notes that FY2026 Budget now exceeds $1 billion, asks councillors which departments should be pulled, requests questions to be submitted in advance, objects to a recent department head exit not being included in the Budget, wants more detailed information on Loan Orders - will pass to 2nd Reading and refer to Finance Committee; brief comments by City Manager Yi-An Huang, Asst. City Manager for Fiscal Affairs Claire Spinner, Budget Director Taha Jennings; Councillor Wilson asks about process for seeking greater tax increases; additional McGovern, Simmons comments re: reducing residential exemption, increasing property taxes and public engagement; Yi-An Huang, Claire Spinner, Taha Jennings note that City has kept Council apprised much earlier in the process due to new economic environment, fact that setting of tax rates depend on other factors to be known later, altering residential exemption would only shift money around and not the tax levy which is a 7.8% increase, possible shift from commercial to residential taxpayers; McGovern entertains notion of increasing taxes to fund pet projects; Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Because the City decided this year to decouple employee benefits from the individual department budgets, it’s a bit difficult to do my usual multi-year comparisons of individual department budgets. Some of the key features of the FY26 Budget are:

a) an overall 3.7% increase in the Operating Budget [from $955,584,350 in the FY25 Adopted Budget to $991,181,320 in the FY26 Submitted Budget;

b) a Public Investment Budget of $41,204,770 and Loan Authorizations of $109,936,000 (see below) yielding a Total Capital Budget of $151,140,770;

c) a total property tax levy of $677,732,415 to support the General Fund Operating and Capital Budgets - an increase of 7.85% from the FY25 property tax levy; and

d) 19 new full-time positions.

Manager’s Agenda #3. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $7,500,000 to provide funds for the design and construction of open space at Ahern Field and surrounding amenities. [text of Loan Order]
#3-#11 pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #4. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $16,500,000 to provide funds for the reconstruction of various City streets and sidewalks. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #5. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $11,100,000 to provide funds for the Municipal Facilities Improvement Plan. Funds will support significant building improvements and deferred maintenance projects. Proposed projects include but are not limited to upgrades of Public Works facilities, municipal offices, youth centers, branch libraries, fire stations, and deferred maintenance. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #6. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $19,986,000 to provide funds for financing school building upgrades. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #7. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $27,500,000 to provide funds for the design and construction of surface enhancements and sewer and drainage infrastructure improvements in Central Square. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #8. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $3,000,000 to provide funds for the sewer Combined Sewer Overflow Program and for planning and design of a floodwater storage tank. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #9. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $7,500,000 to provide funds for the sewer Capital Repairs Program and projects related to climate change preparedness efforts. (CM25#99) [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #10. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $15,250,000 to provide funds for Ozone Generator replacement; Lead Service Line replacement; and water works construction projects in coordination with DPW street restoration projects, which include repair and or replacement of water infrastructure at Dana Street, Sciarappa Street, Massachusetts Ave 4, Haskell Street and Hillside Avenue. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #11. Transmitting Communication from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to the appropriation and authorization to borrow $1,600,000 to provide funds for the design and construction of open space at Wilder Lee Playground and play areas at 359 Broadway. [text of Loan Order]
pulled by Nolan; Passed to 2nd Reading and Referred to Finance Committee 9-0

A Work in Progress

Manager’s Agenda #13. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to an update on the Community Safety Department. [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; comments by Sobrinho-Wheeler, Yi-An Huang notes that Community Safety Director Liz Speakman will be moving on to the Boston Area Race Crisis Center, to be succeeded by Marie Mathieu (who has been social worker at libraries and more recently as Asst. Director of Clinical Services with the Community Safety Department); comments by Marie Mathieu, Liz Speakman; Sobrinho-Wheeler tries to stoke controversy over existence of a parallel co-response initiative within the Cambridge Police Department (per Harvard Crimson article); McGovern comments; Nolan discusses definitions of co-response vs. “alternative response” and rationale for there being a clinician within Emergency Communications (well-explained by Owen O’Riordan & McGovern); Nolan notes the George Floyd period and how CSD can to exist, very inappropriately asks Liz Speakman if tension of not realizing the full potential of CARE and the stress of perhaps not feeling fully supported part of the reason you are leaving; Simmons notes that this is a very inappropriate question; Liz Speakman makes a personal statement expressing gratitude; Zusy comments about redundant services; Azeem asks about # of phone calls expected (8-10 calls/day); Siddiqui, Wilson, Simmons comments; Yi-An Huang notes great strides of CPD in “progressive policing”, offers explanation of distinction between CPD and CARE responses; Placed on File, Referred to Public Safety Committee 9-0

I really want this new department to be successful, but I am not all clear about what its actual function is.

Unfulfilled Wish Lists and Good Enough For Now

Manager’s Agenda #15. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to Awaiting Report Item Number 25-8, regarding a request to create a plan with a schedule and milestones to move forward with the creation of a Municipal Broadband Network and present it for consideration by the Council at a Finance Committee meeting in the context of capital projects for coming years. [text of report]
Placed on File 9-0

Order #3. That the City Manager is requested to direct the appropriate departments to review the city’s digital equity work to date, assessing whether residents’ digital needs are or could be better provided for and to propose how we can better meet their needs.   Councillor Zusy, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Azeem
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy re: delay in municipal broadband, Chromebooks distributed but no one knows how to use them; Nolan comments on past Digital Equity Study; Wilson notes that Manning Apts. residents did receive some training with the Chromebooks; Order Adopted 9-0

Manager’s Agenda #18. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager regarding the Transition Wellness Center (TWC). [text of report]
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler who wants to fund anything and everything; comments by McGovern who would still like to fund TWC for another year; comments by Wilson who “wants to move some dollars around to make this work”; Zusy notes that there is $48.7 million and $15.5 Million for homelessness and housing stability in FY26 Budget for housing - very generous; Nolan comments; Simmons notes that Yi-An Huang recommends not continuing the TWC and has explained the basis for this recommendation, additional comments that this was never meant as a permanent solution; Placed on File 9-0

Committee Report #3. The Finance Committee held a public hearing on Thurs, Mar 27, 2025 to receive a status update on the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding in Cambridge, as well as to review and discuss the Police Department budget for FY26 before it is submitted to the City Manager, as required under Cambridge Municipal Code Chapter 2.74.040, and to further discuss the Free Cash Appropriation Requests, CM25#40 and CM25#41, referred to the Finance Committee on Mar 17, 2025. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I suppose it’s fair to say that elected officials (and candidates) are often judged on what they promise to deliver and not necessarily on their ability to deliver on those promises. It’s also easy in our system to play good cop/bad cop with the City Manager and the City Administration by making a show of how hard you tried to establish and fund an initiative that may actually make little sense on financial or practical grounds. One great example is the proposal for municipal broadband - and I take note of a City Council Order this week to focus instead on “assessing whether residents’ digital needs are or could be better provided for and to propose how we can better meet their needs.” A more recent example is the divided vote on whether to reverse course and continue the Covid-era Transition Wellness Center. The Manager is recommending to proceed with its planned closure and to find alternate accommodations for its few remaining residents. It remains to be seen whether the City will find a suitable alternative to the “Rise Up” local welfare program that was created from the ARPA windfall.

The Little Stuff That Counts

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to establish a Lost and Found program at Cambridge City Hall.   Mayor Simmons, Vice Mayor McGovern
Order Adopted 9-0

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the Community Development Department to assemble a list of public and private spaces available to the public, indoors and outdoors, noting contact information and any associated requirements, ensuring that there are public meeting places identified in each neighborhood.   Councillor Zusy, Councillor Toner, Mayor Simmons, Councillor Nolan
pulled by Zusy; comments by Zusy noting that CDD used to have a listing of indoor meeting spaces and that this should be restored and to also include outdoor spaces; Order Adopted 9-0

I like these kinds of bread-and-butter initiatives – practical and ordinary stuff. I will suggest that any accounting of available public and private meeting and event spaces should include outreach to the many churches and related buildings that are actually plentiful.

It’s A Job

Order #4. City Council requesting that the Chair of the Government Operations, Rules, and Claims Committee initiate the process of re-appointing the City Auditor.   Mayor Simmons, Councillor Toner
pulled by Sobrinho-Wheeler; Simmons notes that the Order already states that this is to be referred to Gov’t Operations Committee (though the Order actually only refers this to the Chair of the committee); McGovern, Nolan, Toner comments; Order Adopted, Referred to Gov’t Operations Committee 9-0

There will also have to be a process to appoint a new City Clear when our dear Diane LeBlanc retires next month. Paula Crane will serve as Interim City Clerk in the meantime, and I hope she’ll at least consider taking on the City Clerk role for the next three years.

That moment when you celebrate the retirement of someone you knew when he first took the job 33 years ago.

Resolution #7. Congratulations to Officer Victor Martignetti on his retirement from the Cambridge Police Department.   Councillor Toner, Councillor Wilson, Mayor Simmons

You really become aware of the passage of time when you see people who you knew when they started a job now retiring decades later. Victor isn’t the first. There have been quite a few long-term City employees whose long careers began and ended on my watch.

Committee Report #1. The Economic Development and University Relations Committee held a public hearing on Mar 20, 2025. The meeting was a Cannabis Roundtable with cannabis businesses to discuss issues facing the retail cannabis industry in Cambridge and discuss potential changes, including adjustments to the current 1,800-foot buffer zones and introduction of social consumption. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

I continue to be amazed at the degree to which our City Council caters to this one industry. If only they could be as receptive to the concerns of the rest of us.

Committee Report #2. The Health and Environment Committee held a public hearing on Mar 25, 2025 to review and discuss the update to the Zero Waste Master Plan (ZWMP) 2.0. [text of report]
Report Accepted, Placed on File 9-0

Comments?

Members Sought for Cambridge Commercial Parking Control Committee

Apr 24, 2025 – Cambridge City Manager Yi-An Huang is seeking new members for the Cambridge Commercial Parking Control Committee, a five-member board established to review applications for new Commercial Parking Permits.

The Commercial Parking Control Committee is established pursuant to Chapter 10.16.030 of the Cambridge Municipal Code. Committee members will be appointed by the Cambridge City Council and initial appointment will be for a term of 1-3 years and will be eligible for reappointment.

Applicants must be Cambridge residents. No person shall be appointed to the Committee who has a financial interest in commercial parking in Cambridge.

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.

Members of the Commercial Parking Control Committee should be able to:

• Participate in a collaborative process with other Committee members.
• Consider diverse ideas and perspectives with empathy and respect.
• Be willing to work with the Cambridge Department of Transportation.
• Review and understand the City of Cambridge’s policies, rules, and regulations related to Commercial Parking; understand issues related to the safety, sustainability, and accessibility of the city’s transportation network and its operations.
• Be willing to navigate complex issues related to how parking supports public policy, accessibility, economic development, and other City of Cambridge goals.
• Demonstrate strong attentiveness and listening skills to complex presentations and discussions.

The Commercial Parking Control Committee will meet on an as-needed basis (at least biannually) based on submission of applications for Commercial Parking Permits. Members must review applications and application materials prior to each meeting they attend. Recent changes in city regulations establishing Flexible Parking Corridors have lowered barriers to the establishment of Commercial Parking, and we anticipate a renewed interest in Commercial Parking Permits. For more information on Flexible Parking Corridors, visit https://www.cambridgema.gov/streetsandtransportation/flexibleparkingcorridors.

Under the provisions of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, meetings are usually required to be in person, although the Commercial Parking Control Committee may meet remotely under the temporary Open Meeting Law provisions.

Applications to serve on this committee can be submitted by Monday, June 2, 2025, to City Manager Yi-An Huang using the City’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/Apply. A cover letter and résumé or applicable experience should be submitted during the online application process.

It’s the end of Kendall Square as we know it. What if biotech never bounces back?

by Kara Miller, Boston Globe, April 14, 2025

So many of the financial decisions, housing policies, and transportation policies made by the City of Cambridge are omelettes made from the golden eggs of the Kendall Square Goose. What happens when the goose stops laying those golden eggs? How much will commercial property values fall? Will upward pressure on housing prices and rents subside or reverse direction? Will the average salaries of our young, fast, and scientific residents decrease?

Pardon me for suggesting this, but shouldn’t these questions be asked at our upcoming meetings of the Cambridge City Council’s Finance Committee - especially the meetings on the FY2026 Budget?

As the old saying goes, it’s never a good idea to put all of your (golden) eggs in one basket. - RW

Deputy City Manager City Manager Owen O’Riordan Announces Retirement

Dear City Councilors,

I wanted to let you know that I will retire from the City on July 5th of this year. My wife Nora retired last year and so we are looking forward to being able to spend more time together in the coming years.

I wanted to thank you for your friendship and support to me over the years and am grateful that we have been able to accomplish so much over my time working for the City.

I have worked here for twenty-eight years, and it has been a deeply rewarding experience. While I have never lived in the city, the city has lived in me for the 28 years and has been my constant companion from first thing in the morning until I go to bed each night.

I expect to send an email out to staff tomorrow morning but wanted you to know in advance.

Sincerely,
Owen

Owen O’Riordan
Deputy City Manager
City of Cambridge

Member Sought for Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) Board of Commissioners Vacancy

Apr 10, 2025 – What is the Cambridge Housing Authority?
The Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) was established in 1935. It provides long-term rental housing and rental assistance. More than 10,000 low-income families, elders, and disabled individuals receive this assistance. CHA invests in Cambridge families and provides enhanced support to 10% of the city population. The CHA mission is to develop and manage safe, good quality, affordable housing for low-income individuals and families in a manner which promotes citizenship, community and self-reliance in one of the most expensive housing markets in the country. Learn more about Cambridge Housing Authority.

What are the terms of appointment for the CHA Board?
The Board of Commissioners is a five-member Board with each member serving five years. One member is appointed by the Governor of Massachusetts; the remaining four members are appointed by the Cambridge City Manager and confirmed by the Cambridge City Council. All Board members must be residents of Cambridge, and one member must physically reside in CHA/affiliate owned housing.

What is the role of the Cambridge Housing Authority Board?
The CHA Board oversees the Agency's direction. This includes approving:

• Contract awards
• Budget decisions
• Formal submissions to state and federal funding agencies
• Planning and reporting documents
• Major policy decisions

Commissioners also serve as board members on CHA’s five non-profit affiliates. The Board appoints an Executive Director to oversee the housing authority and implement the Board’s policies.

What kind of skills/experience should members have?
For this vacant seat, applicants must be residents of CHA/affiliate-owned housing. Cambridge Housing Authority commissioners should believe in the mission of the Housing Authority and the urgent need for affordable housing in Cambridge. Preferred skills include:

• Computer literacy to participate in hybrid meetings
• Ability to interact with the public
• Advocacy skills

Additionally, the City of Cambridge and CHA are committed to advancing a culture of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Board members 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.

How can I apply to serve on the committee?
Applications to serve on the Board can be submitted using the City of Cambridge’s online application system at Cambridgema.gov/apply. A cover letter and resume or applicable experience may be submitted during the online application process.

The application deadline is Monday, May 12, 2025.

Just in case you were interested…

The City Clerks and City Managers of Cambridge (revised Mar 18, 2025, includes Managers’ contracts)

The Mayors of Cambridge since 1846

Plan E Cambridge City Councils - At A Glance (Mayor in bold)

Plan E Cambridge School Committees (and Mayors) At A Glance

Local Walks/Hikes – Boston Walking Meetup Group (BWMG), AMC, DCR, etc.

Sun, May 18. Fresh Pond Sunset Walk. [BWMG] Meet at 6:00pm (EDT) at intersection of Huron Ave. and Aberdeen Ave., Cambridge.

Sun, May 25. Fresh Pond Sunset Walk. [BWMG] Meet at 6:00pm (EDT) at intersection of Huron Ave. and Aberdeen Ave., Cambridge.

Sun, June 1. Fresh Pond Sunset Walk. [BWMG] Meet at 6:00pm (EDT) at intersection of Huron Ave. and Aberdeen Ave., Cambridge.

If you would like to walk and talk (history, civics, politics, mathematics, or anything else), I am almost always on the Fresh Pond Sunset Walk every Sunday (see above). - Robert Winters

The Cambridge City Charter: From Town Meeting to Plan E (premiered May 15, 2023 on CCTV Channel 9)

A chronology of the 1972 conflict over Proportional Representation in Cambridge (posted Feb 24, 2023)

Plan E Cambridge City Councils - At A Glance (Mayor in bold) — Comments?

Plan E Cambridge School Committees (and Mayors) At A Glance — Comments?

In case you were wondering about how to make Cambridge’s PR elections independent of how the ballots are counted…
Election Method Comparison – STV/Cincinnati vs. Fractional Transfer – 2021 Cambridge City Council Election (posted Jan 15, 2022)

Featured recent stories in the Cambridge Chronicle (the paper of record) - with some comments:

If you would like to subscribe or pick up a free paper copy at various sites, I encourage you to do so. It really is The Paper of Record - even if it is currently understaffed and in need of rejuvenation. What we really need is a summit meeting of all Cambridge news providers, including CCTV and Cambridge Municipal TV, to figure out a long-term plan. We absolute need to get Gannett to the table to talk about any long-term plans they may have and if and when the Cambridge Chronicle might be restored to its former role (dating back to 1846) as an essential source for news and features about Cambridge (as opposed to regional feeds of little or no relevance to the people of Cambridge).

A new food hall is coming to the Cambridge mall. Here’s what restaurants it will have (Oct 22, 2024)

Head of the Charles Regatta weekend rowing event in Cambridge (Oct 18, 2024)

Poll tests statewide support for MBTA Communities Act. Its results may surprise (Sept 26, 2024)

Harmful bacteria found in the Charles River? Here’s what to know. (Sept 24, 2024)

Voter’s guide: How to vote early in Massachusetts. What you need to know (Sept 22, 2024)

Julie Wormser starts Oct. 1 as Cambridge’s first chief climate officer (Sept 18, 2024)

Decker beats MacKay in Democratic primary recount for State House seat (Sept 13, 2024)

Recount Sept. 12 between Democrats contending for Cambridge state rep (Sept 12, 2024)

Cambridge state representative race may require a recount (Sept 4, 2024)

Massachusetts Ballot Questions 2024: MCAS, medical psychedelics, more (Sept 4, 2024)

Porter Square Books plans move to larger space in Cambridge (Aug 27, 2024)

Cambridge Brewing Company announces closure. Here’s are the details (Aug 20, 2024)

Cambridge artist Elizabeth Rawls spends her retirement free motion quilting (Aug 14, 2024)

Who were Cambridge’s 25 top paid municipal employees in 2023? We have a list (May 23, 2024)

Cambridge city, school employee salaries for 2023: Searchable Database

HOW TO BREAK A POLITICAL MACHINE

pictures added Mar 27, 2021 scanned from original magazine
[Collier’s Magazine, January 31, 1948]
Comments?

THE MUNICIPAL SITUATION IN CAMBRIDGE

A Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the National Municipal League at Chicago, April 28, 1904
by Henry N. Wheeler, President of the League
preceded by a Program of the Work of the League for 1904
[original PDF]

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes on CCJ Forum

Cambridge InsideOut currently airs every first and third Tuesday at 6:00pm and 6:30pm with producers/hosts Robert Winters and (sometimes) Patrick Barrett. We will have other guest hosts as well. All shows are posted on YouTube after broadcast.

[complete list of shows - with links to YouTube videos (and now audio too!)]

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 643-644: Mar 4, 2025 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 641-642: Feb 4, 2025 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 639-640: Jan 7, 2025 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 637-638: Dec 17, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 635-636: Nov 19, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 633-634: Nov 5, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 631-632: Oct 15, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 629-630: Sept 17, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 627-628: Sept 3, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 625-626: Aug 6, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 623-624: July 2, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 621-622: June 18, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 619-620: June 4, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 617-618: May 21, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 615-616: Apr 16, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 613-614: Mar 19, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 611-612: Mar 5, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 609-610: Feb 20, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 607-608: Feb 6, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 605-606: Jan 16, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 603-604: Jan 2, 2024 (solo w/Robert Winters)

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 63 and 64 with Glenn Koocher
We had a great time doing these shows with the man who invented the original Cambridge InsideOut - Glenn Koocher.

Cambridge InsideOut on CCTV during 2013-2014 featured co-hosts Susana Segat and Robert Winters.
Cambridge InsideOut on CCTV during 2015-2022 featured co-hosts Judy Nathans and Robert Winters.
Cambridge InsideOut on CCTV during 2022-2023 featured co-hosts Patrick Barrett (sometimes) and Robert Winters.

History - Kendall Square and the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority

MBTA Role in Cambridge Center Project – Kendall Station Urban Initiatives Project, 1979-1989 (Feb 13, 2014 by Thad Tercyak)

Kendall Square Urban Renewal Project: Six Pivotal Episodes (June 8, 2013 by Thad Tercyak)

Kendall Square Urban Renewal Project, Initial Years, 1963 to 1982 (July 12, 2012 by Thad Tercyak)

Kendall Square Urban Renewal Area – Cambridge Redevelopment Authority (Apr 5, 2012)

Open for Comments - CCJ Forum

List of all CCJ Forum posts (2009 – present) – reverse chronologically with author’s name (originally Aug 14, 2022 - updated automatically)

Cinco de Mayo – May 5, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted May 5, 2025, updated May 6)

Urgent Legal and Policy Concerns Regarding Cambridge’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (by Patrick Barrett, posted May 2, 2025)

Current City of Cambridge Board and Commission Vacancies (updated Apr 30, 2025)

Budget Season – April 28, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Apr 28, 2025, updated Apr 29)

The Proposed New Cambridge Charter – For Better or Worse – April 14, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Apr 14, revised Apr 17)

Tending the Garden (Street) – April 7, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Apr 4, 2025, updated Apr 8)

Switching from Cable TV (originally posted May 23, 2024, updated Apr 1, 2025)

Playing Politics – March 31, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Mar 31, 2025, updated Apr 1)

Meanwhile, In Other News – March 24, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Mar 24, 2025, updated Mar 25)

Evacuation Day Special – March 17, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Mar 16, 2025, updated Mar 18)

Just Another Manic Monday – March 3, 2025 Cambridge City Council meeting (posted Mar 5, 2025)

Cambridge Municipal Election News – 2023 (originally posted Oct 25, updated periodically)

Plan E Cambridge School Committees (and Mayors) At A Glance (originally posted Jan 21, 2022, updated Jan 1, 2024)

Plan E Cambridge City Councils At A Glance (originally posted Jan 21, 2022, updated Jan 1, 2024)

Municipal Election Voting Comparison: 2021 vs. 2023 (and then some) (posted Dec 16, 2023)

Voter Success and Number of Candidates – Cambridge Municipal Elections (updated Nov 26, 2023)

Alice Wolf: 1933-2023 (posted Jan 28, 2023)

Completing the Square [originally posted June 11, 2013]

On Love and Elections (Dec 26, 2022 by David Goode)

Sheila Doyle Russell – City Councillor, Mayor, and Friend (posted Dec 13, 2022)

ADDRESS OF THE MAYOR UPON THE FIRST ORGANIZATION OF THE CITY GOVERNMENT – 1846 (posted Dec 11, 2022)

HISTORY OF CAMBRIDGE – Rev. Lucius Paige, 1877 – INDIAN HISTORY (posted Nov 25, 2022)

Election Method Comparison – STV/Cincinnati vs. Fractional Transfer – 2021 Cambridge City Council Election (posted Jan 15, 2022)

A few observations on density (posted Feb 16, 2021)

The Advent of PR in Cambridge (Nov 10, 2013)

Completing the Square (June 11, 2013)

On becoming a True Cantabrigian (Dec 29, 2012 by Glenn Koocher)

The Neverending Study of Central Square

Aug 11, 2012 - While preparing to write a series of essays on Central Square, I put together the following list of Central Square studies culled from a variety of sources. I have originals for most of these. If you know of any others, please let me know. - Robert Winters

Feb 1980 - CDD report entitled “Central Square - Commercial Area Revitalization District”

June 1980 - CDD booklet entitled “Facade Improvements” with focus on Central Square

Apr 1983 - “Central Square Report” produced by City Council’s Central Square Subcommittee (study began in 1980 or 1981)

1987 - A report produced in 1987 about a Subcommittee that allegedly built on the 1983 report (may be same as Central Square Action Plan)

Nov 1987 - Central Square Action Plan

1989 - Draft Central Square Development Guidelines

May 1993 - Results of the “Mayor’s Forum on Central Square”

Oct 1993 - Report by the Committee to Promote and Enhance Central Square Now!

Aug 1994 - A Study of the Visual Images and Signage of Central Square (CDD)

May 1995 - Central Square Improvements Project, Master Plan Report

May 1995 - An Urban Design Plan for Central Square (executive summary)

May 2001 - Summary Notes from “A Conversation about Central Square”

Feb 2000 - The Gibbs Report, Central Square Commercial Market Study - Executive Summary (June 30, 1999)

Oct 2004 - Central Square, Cambridge - Rising Fortunes at a Regional Crossroads (Rekha Murthy)

Dec 2004 - Reviving a Traditional City - Central Square, Cambridge, gets a facelift (Rekha Murthy)

June 2005 - Street Media: Ambient Messages in an Urban Space - a photographic analysis of Central Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts (Rekha Murthy)

2009 - CDD Central Square Customer Intercept Survey Report

2011 - Central Square Market Profile

2011 - Red Ribbon Commission Study Report

2012 - Goody/Clancy report and recommendations

2013 - K2C2 Final Reports (Dec 30, 2013)
The final reports for Kendall Square and Central Square are now available for download. Zoning discussions based on the recommendations of the K2 and C2 Advisory Committees, which are encapsulated in these reports, will continue in 2014.

Kendall Square Central Square Planning Study (K2C2)

Central Square Final Report 2013 Part 1, December 2013 (K2C2)

Central Square Final Report 2013 Part 2, December 2013 (K2C2)

Kendall Square Final Report 2013 Part 1, December 2013 (K2C2)

Kendall Square Final Report 2013 Part 2, December 2013 (K2C2)

This comprehensive planning effort guided by stakeholder advisory committees, City staff, and a team of multidisciplinary consultants led by Goody Clancy, developed a vision and master plan for Central Square, Kendall Square, and the area South of Main Street (including the Osborn Triangle) connecting the two squares. Both final reports are divided into two parts; in each case you will need to review both parts to read the entire report.

2024 - Central Square City Lots Study

FYI - Current Rules and Goals: Cambridge City Council & Cambridge School Committee

City Council Rules 2024-2025 (as amended Mar 25, 2024)

City Council Rules 2022-2023 (as amended Nov 21, 2022)

City Council Rules 2020-2021 (as amended Oct 26, 2020)

City Council Rules 2018-2019 (adopted January 29, 2018; provisionally adopted for 2020-2021 term on Jan 6, 2020)

City Council Rules 2016-2017

City Council Rules 2014-2015 (adopted January 7, 2014, amended Feb 10, 2014 to reflect revised Council committees)

City Council Goals - FY2018 (current, adopted Oct 16, 2017)

City Council Goals - FY2012-2013 (adopted Dec 13, 2011)

City Council Committees (for the current term)

School Committee Rules (Adopted January 1, 2018; Revised June 19, 2018)

School Committee Rules (adopted January 7, 2008)    School Committee Goals (adopted October 7, 2008)

Civic Infrastructure - 2009

June 7, 2009 - Once upon a time there was a civic organization in Cambridge known as the Cambridge Civic Association (CCA). It was formed in 1945 out of several organizations that had been existed through the 1930s and that had lobbied the state legislature to create the Plan E Charter option (1938) which featured a city manager form of government and proportional representation elections for city council and school committee. These reforms were central to model charter reform movements active in the United States from the early 1900s. The central theme of the CCA in its early days was “good government” in the sense of being anti-patronage and for professionally managed local government. This changed with the introduction of rent control at the end of the 1960s after which the CCA shifted leftward and became permanently lashed to the mast of the rent control vessel. Though the CCA still exists on paper (I believe), it rapidly declined after the statewide abolition of rent control (late 1994) and essentially disappeared a decade later (early 2005).

I bring up the ghost of the CCA today only to point out that when it was created it had some very admirable goals. Here’s the original Mission Statement of the CCA:

Purposes: This association is formed for the following purposes:

1. To promote businesslike, honest, and efficient conduct of local government, open to public scrutiny.
2. To induce residents to take an active interest in the affairs of the City of Cambridge.
3. To encourage and support the candidacy of men and women seeking election to public office and to support intelligent, wholesome leadership in public affairs.
4. To assure that the best qualified persons are appointed to positions in the City government after consideration of all qualified candidates.
5. To promote among the citizens of Cambridge equitable distribution and benefit of public services and equal opportunity for economic security, education, and social advancement.

These are pretty good founding principles for a civic organization and I’m tempted to say that some should be incorporated into the recently adopted City Council’s Goals for FY2010 (adopted Feb 2, 2009). In fact, of the 22 current goals, the only one that comes close is: “An increased level of recruitment and opportunities for membership on boards and commissions.” The current Council goals emphasize things like “fostering community” via block parties and such, though one has to wonder if the City should be promoting these activities or just getting out of the way so that people can foster community on their own. The goals also seem to put some emphasis on developing “successful nightlife campaigns” while mentioning nothing about promoting ordinary “daytime” economic activity that supports the everyday needs of residents.

One founding principle of the CCA that fell into disuse over the years is listed above as #3: To encourage and support the candidacy of men and women seeking election to public office and to support intelligent, wholesome leadership in public affairs. Indeed, I can personally testify to the fact that in its dying years the only reason the CCA made endorsements at all was because the CCA-endorsed incumbents wanted the benefit of having an advertised CCA slate of candidates that would help secure their reelection. There was precious little effort to recruit new candidates or to support them. Today, the benefits of incumbency are greater than ever. The cost of political campaigns have become absurdly high and most of the incumbents now have (City paid) staff who are inevitably political appointees who directly or indirectly assist in the reelection efforts of their bosses. The deck is increasingly stacked against challengers. Furthermore, the salary and benefits for elected councillors are now so sweet that it is unlikely that any of them would ever want to move on to another job.

With this background in mind, I would like to encourage all Cambridge residents to help level the playing field by finding out about this year’s challengers for seats on the Cambridge City Council and the Cambridge School Committee. This is not meant as a dig against any particular incumbent as much as an appeal to support the challengers in what is a difficult and laudable effort. Please see the Cambridge Candidate Pages for the current list of expected candidates. Then use your own judgment - don’t expect me or anyone else to do it for you.

Speaking of this year’s municipal election, there are some activists who are now expending great effort to attack the City Manager and most of the current City Council. That is not nor has it ever been the intention of the Cambridge Civic Journal or its editor. Candidates are now being seduced by financial promises from one angry fellow with a Brattle Street address and a basketful of grudges. Former CCA Executive Board members from its darkest and most manipulative days are oozing up from the civic swamp trying to at last make good on their failed campaigns of the early 1990s to oust city manager Bob Healy.

It’s entertaining to watch people who have primarily earned disrespect in their civic efforts try to capitalize on the recent Monteiro jury decision as a means of realizing their decades-old vendettas. Conveniently forgotten in their recent letters to Cambridge’s “oldest weekly newspaper” are the many achievements of City Manager Bob Healy, the strong financial position of the City, and the recent 8-1 vote of confidence bestowed upon Mr. Healy in granting him a three year contract extension. Also missing in this testimony is the fact that virtually all affirmative action in the hiring of employees and department heads has taken place on Mr. Healy’s watch. These letters also fail to divulge how long these writers have been carrying their jealousy and anger toward Mr. Healy for actually orchestrating progress in Cambridge while the best they could ever do is snipe from the sidelines. - Robert Winters

Selected City of Cambridge References:

Plan E Charter (Cambridge’s city charter)

Acts of 1921, Chapter 239 as amended (establishment of Cambridge Election Commission)

Mass. General Laws Chapter 54A (governing Cambridge’s PR elections)

Pen Portraits of Prominent People - by Henry J. Mahoney Editor, Cambridge Sentinel - 1923

This book was published c. 1923 and features very witty one-page “pen portraits” (with photo) of prominent Cantabrigians of the day. I’ll be adding names alphabetically as time permits. There are 182 portraits in the book.

It comes to mind that there may be some value in expanding these profiles to other prominent Cantabrigians who arrived on the scene after 1923, including prominent Cantabrigians of today. With this in mind, I extend the invitation to any and all who may wish to contribute their own “pen portraits” of Cambridge people. Contributions do not necessarily have to be in the style of Mr. Mahoney. Inclusion is, as always, subject to the erratic discretion of the editor.

Special thanks to Karen Welch for sending me the book. - RW

Political History of Cambridge in the 20th Century - by Glenn Koocher (Nov 2004); edited by Robert Winters (July 2006)
[An alternate edit of this essay appeared, along with many other valuable essays, in a centennial volume to be published by the Cambridge Historical Society in 2007.]

Which People’s Republic - by Bill Cunningham (1999)