November is Hire A Veteran Month in Massachusetts
Throughout November, Massachusetts’ One-Stop Career Centers will hold special workshops and information sessions to help veterans find jobs. This campaign is sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Workforce Development and the Department of Veterans’ Services in partnership with the U.S. Department of Labor. Employers are being encouraged hire veterans and to sign up to be acknowledged as a “Veterans Friendly Employer” by contacting the Department of Veteran’s Services at 617-210-5970 or go to mass.gov/veterans. You may also link to www.mass.gov/careercenters to learn about services offered to veterans and other job-seekers. (Thank you to Estella Johnson, Director of Economic Development, City of Cambridge for this write-up.)
November 14 City Council Meeting
The Council spent much of the meeting discussing sidewalks. They also received a transmittal from the City Manager of the Planning Board’s recommendations to Amend the Massachusetts Avenue Overlay District and a report on Eminent Domain.
Sidewalks
The Council spent much of the meeting discussing a report form the City Manager on the City’s policies regarding brick sidewalks. Much of the discussion surrounded the need to monitor sidewalks and repair sidewalks requiring repair. A copy of the report is available at http://www.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/cmLetter.cfm?item_id=5258. To report a sidewalk in need of repair contact the Cambridge Department of Public Works at 617- 349-4846 or by e-mail at theworks@cambridgema.gov. Include the address of the sidewalk and your contact information.
Massachusetts Avenue Overlay District
The City Manager transmitted the Planning Board recommendations for amending the Massachusetts Avenue Overlay District. This area runs approximately from Harvard Square to Porter Square along Massachusetts Avenue. The intent of the zoning changes is to encourage continued retail uses along this corridor. A copy of City Manager’s transmittal letter is available at http://www.cambridgema.gov/cityclerk/cmLetter.cfm?item_id=5257. The Planning Commission’s report is available by clicking “View Attached Letter” on the City Manager’s letter.
Eminent Domain
In response to the United States Supreme Court ruling in the case of Kelo, et al v. the City of New London, Connecticut the Council passed several orders regarding the impact of this decision on the City’s eminent domain powers. The City Manager responded with a detailed analysis from the City Solicitor of the impact of this case on the City. The bottom line is that the Supreme Court decision does not change or expand the City’s eminent domain powers but highlights and reaffirms the principle that a government authority can take a property for a legitimate public purpose and that there must be compensation for that taking. A copy if the report is available at http://www.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content/documents/Eminent.Domain.doc.
November 15 GAC Meeting
The topic for discussion at the November GAC meeting was “So Who is Going to be Mayor?” Our guest was Robert Winters, editor of the Cambridge Civic Journal who maintains a website on local government and politics at www.rwinters.com.
The major news from the election was the defeat of incumbent City Councillor David Maher by Craig Kelley who was on his third run for City Council and the defeat of two incumbent School Committee members, Marc McGovern and Ben Lummis, by first time candidates Patty Nolan and Luc Schuster. The drop in the number of voters, from 20,958 to 16,202 this year is also an important story from last week.
Mr. Winters stated that the results for City Council were attributable to demographic changes with newer voters drawn to candidates who are perceived as being “progressive.” The term “progressive” is not well defined so individual perceptions often define the “progressives” from the “non-progressives” rather than actual views on issues and actions while in office. Four of the incumbents, Mayor Sullivan and Councillors Galluccio, Maher, and Toomey, are perceived as outside of the “progressive” fold by new voters. This provided the opportunity for a “progressive” to fill a seat. Craig Kelley, being perceived as a progressive and having run two years ago, had an advantage over other challengers. There was general acknowledgement that the actual views of the nine incumbents on the current Council differ little and based purely on their views on public policy issues and actions as elected officials would be considered “progressives” in most of the country.
The consensus of the GAC members in attendance was that it was sad to lose David Maher as a member of the City Council. He is well known in the business community as a City Councillor and as through his work at Cambridge Family and Children Services. Most participants knew little about Craig Kelley and those that did focused on his actions as a community activist and candidate. Mr. Kelley has often questioned both the decisions made by City management and elected officials and the motivation leading to those actions. He is viewed as allied with people who have used personal attacks when expressing differences with elected officials and City staff. To now work effectively he has, as one person said, “a lot of fences to mend.”
The results in the School Committee, where two incumbents who ran as outsiders last time were replaced by two candidates who ran as outsiders this time may be a result of the difficulty of going from outsider to incumbent. The four School Committee members re-elected all have identified constituencies while outsiders rely on people who want to change the system. That constituency may have a predilection for voting for challengers. Winters joked that, given at least one incumbent being defeated in the last three School Committee elections, a seat on the School Committee may now be less a seat but a revolving door.
Mr. Winters explanation for the drop is that turnout last time was much higher because of the referendum on the ballot to bring back rent control. That issue brought out a large anti-rent control electorate, an electorate that voted heavily for those four incumbents considered not progressive. (It should be noted that only one incumbent, Denise Simmons, supported the rent control referendum in 2003). Many voters who came out to vote on the rent control issue, viewing the City has relatively well managed, saw no compelling reason to vote this time. There was discussion about how quiet the election was compared to previous years and an acknowledgement that this reduced turnout.
There was no definitive answer on the topic of the day “So Who is Going to be Mayor?” The hope is that the Council will make this decision at the start of the new term rather than let it drag on into February or March as it has on occasion. Several factors will be in play as the Council decides who will be the next Mayor. One clear issue is how well a Councillor gets along with his or her colleagues. Personalities appear to play a greater factor than they did when there were clear ideological differences between slates of candidates. Incumbents’ plans to run for different offices next year will also be a factor.
GAC members hope that the election results are not likely to result in changes to the management of the City. A major duty of the City Council is to hire the City Manager and the current Manager’s contract runs until June of next year. Eight of the nine Councillors-elect are on the record, to differing degrees, in favor of retaining Robert Healy as City Manager and several major capital improvements projects, including the Library expansion and the new Police headquarters, will likely serve as incentives for Mr. Healy to enter into a new contract.
