[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:01] You can hear me, mayor. I can hear you. I can hear you. You can't hear me. I can hear you now. I can hear you. Yeah, perfect. We're just going to promote councilor LZB before we start.
[0:20] All right, Madam Mayor.
[0:24] Hey. It's five thirty. Great. And we have a quorum.
[0:33] Yes, you do. Great. Good evening, everyone. A quorum of the city council being present.
[0:40] I wanted to call tonight's January 26th, 2026 regular meeting of the Cambridge City Council
[0:48] to order.
[0:49] The first order of visits is a role call of members present, please.
[0:53] The term Quirk, Quaint, Crane.
[0:56] Councillor Azubi, President, President Vice-Mirazim, President, President, Council of Flaherty,
[1:03] President, President, Council of McEvern,
[1:07] Council of McEvern is absent, Councillor Nolan,
[1:14] Councillor Nolan, is listed as absent, Councillor Simmons, present and notable.
[1:20] Present, Councillor Sabrina Wheeler, present, Councillor Zucy, present, present, near Sadiki,
[1:27] present.
[1:28] Yes, and you have seven members recorded as present and two recorded as absent.
[1:33] Thank you.
[1:33] Hear the rules.
[1:34] Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and Pause for a Moment of Silence.
[1:39] Congratulations to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.
[1:45] One nation under God and divisible with liberty and justice for all.
[1:54] Her chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025 adopted by Massachusetts General Court and approved by the governor.
[2:00] The city is authorized to use remote participation at meetings of the Cambridge City Council.
[2:05] In addition to having members of the Council participate remotely,
[2:08] we've set up Zoom teleconference for public comment.
[2:11] You can also view the meeting via the city's open meeting portal or on the city's cable channel 22.
[2:17] To speak during public comment, you must sign up at www.kamerjame.gov slash public comment.
[2:24] You can also email your written comments for the record to the city clerk at city clerk at kamerjame.gov.
[2:30] We welcome your participation and you can sign up until 6 p.m.
[2:34] Please note that the city of Cambridge Audio and Video records this meeting and makes it available to the public for future viewing.
[2:40] In addition, third parties may also be audio and video recording this meeting.
[2:47] We will now move on to public comment.
[2:50] Public comment may be made in the court with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 38, Section 20G and the City Council rules 23D and 37.
[3:00] Once you finish speaking, the next speaker will be called.
[3:03] Individuals are not permitted to allocate the remainder of their time to other speakers.
[3:06] I ask that you state your name.
[3:09] That is for the record and the item on the agenda that you are speaking on.
[3:13] We have over 59 speakers who have signed up.
[3:18] Each speaker will have two minutes for the rules.
[3:21] So we will start.
[3:22] Go ahead to public comment.
[3:24] Madam Mayor.
[3:25] Yes.
[3:26] Council of Nolan is listed as present.
[3:29] Great.
[3:29] Present.
[3:30] Thank you.
[3:31] Our first speaker will be Elizabeth Rucker, followed by Louise Vendon,
[3:35] then Denise Jolson. Elizabeth, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[3:44] My name is Elizabeth Rucker, and I live at 94 Monobello Road in Jamaica Plane. I managed
[3:50] the Democracy Center for eight years as the sole employee assigned to it within the Foundation
[3:54] for civic leadership, and I'm here to speak on the landmark petition for the Nathaniel
[3:59] Stigney House. I continue to work, play and participate in the Cambridge Community
[4:04] multiple days per week. In my former position, I handled all aspects of 45 monoburn street,
[4:11] including its physical structures and all programs. Please vote in favor of landmarking the
[4:15] building at 45 monoburn street. Landmarking this building is key to ensuring the appropriateness
[4:20] of new construction and additions and to celebrate the robust history of civic engagement
[4:25] that was led from this building. The Historic Commission's Favorable Report lays out key architectural
[4:31] points at length so I will speak to the importance of 45 on Auburn Street to the people and
[5:00] To see from the ground up. For 22 years, this building was a crossroads of good people doing good work.
[5:06] Here, generations came together to share wisdom and support, and to nuclear activists mentored those who
[5:11] would lead the movement for black lives. Here, community leaders used our space to feed,
[5:15] clothing, shelter immigrants turned out of shelters and Massachusetts. Here, Cambridge by Xafety,
[5:21] even organized to pass a city by Xafety ordinance. Here, Harvard students from fossil fuel
[5:26] I vest planned their first direct actions, and 2019 trans people in their allies successfully
[5:31] mounted a campaign to defend transgender rights statewide.
[5:35] Aaron Swartz, the legendary internet freedom activist, had an office on the third floor.
[5:39] I do not have time to list everyone who has made history big and small at the Democracy
[5:43] Center.
[5:44] But the Cambridge we are building together has much of the positive history toward the
[5:49] hearts of 45 Mount Auburn Street, and I encourage you at this time when so much history
[5:54] is being maliciously rewritten. To preserve our history and celebrate our victories across
[5:59] generations by landmarking 45 Mount Auburn Street for all of us. Thank you.
[6:05] Thank you, our next speaker will be Louise Vendon,
[6:08] followed by Denise Jilsen, then Dan Taien.
[6:12] Louise has not joined, we will go to Denise Jilsen. Denise, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[6:20] Good evening, Denise Jolson, the Executive Director for the Harvard Square Business Association.
[6:27] And I'm here speaking tonight on policy order, 2026-17.
[6:34] But before I do, I also want to just weigh in on 45-mile Auburn Street.
[6:39] I think landmarking that building is a, it makes good sense, and we should consider doing it.
[6:48] I think it means a lot to Harvard Square and Harvard Square's history, and we should consider the recommendation from Charlie Sullivan.
[6:58] Thank you. Here tonight to speak about policy order regarding pedestrianization, and I want to first of all thank
[7:18] here and thoughtfulness. Especially so when we consider a business district like Harvard Square,
[7:23] which is comprised of approximately 44 acres, about a million square feet of retail restaurant,
[7:29] services, hotels and social service providers.
[7:34] And we, of which, by the way, 70% are still
[7:38] locally owned independent. We also received between 68 million visitors per year. And when we consider
[7:48] The talent that we have within the city within the department heads and staff of the, I think we're not calling it Department of Transportation, within community development, within the Harvard Square Business Association, as well as the Harvard Square Advisory, and this body, this, this, you know, the City Council, as well as neighbors and property owners who have weighed in over the years regarding pedestrianization.
[8:15] I feel confident that there is not a group of people better suited who understand the cadence
[8:23] of Harvard Square and will work to enhance not only the pedestrianization but the curation
[8:29] of the public space. We want to partner with the city of Cambridge and hope that all of you
[8:35] will support this council order. Thank you.
[8:40] Our next speaker is Dan Taun followed by Ian Simmons
[8:44] than Jerry Pouchello. Dan, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[8:52] Yes, hi. My name is Dan Totten. I live at 54 Bishop Malindrive and I also want to speak
[8:59] in support of Landmarking the building at 4335 Mount Auburn Street. I am a community member,
[9:07] a former frequent user of the Democracy Center and a signatory to the original Landmark
[9:13] The building does have objective historical and architectural significance when it was built nearly 200 years ago.
[9:20] The surrounding area was pasture land.
[9:22] It was one of the few surviving structures from that era in a neighborhood who is a peal as a global tourist destination is inseparable from its historic building.
[9:30] The fact that this building has been listed since 1982 on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing resource is evidence that these concerns did not come out of thin air over the past year.
[10:00] Last 25 years, the building served as the Democracy Center, one of the city's last remaining affordable gathering spaces for working class organizers and community groups.
[10:08] As Cambridge has transformed into a playground for the wealthy, working class residents and the spaces that serve them have been systematically erased.
[10:15] The closure of the Democracy Center is part of that problem.
[10:18] I do agree that discretion is important, and I share concerns about the historical process, potentially blocking housing in some cases,
[10:27] but I think in this case, we have no promise of housing, I would love it if Mr. Simmons
[10:32] would promise us some housing on the site.
[10:35] But I think that it's very important that we maintain a degree of accountability over what
[10:44] happens on this site so that as we go forward, as we go forward that the owner is not allowed
[10:53] do whatever he wants, carte blanche. It's been almost two years since this happened and the promise
[11:00] of bringing the community in engaging with us and meeting with us has never come to fruition
[11:05] and I would really value an opportunity to have that discussion respectfully and with Mr. Simmons
[11:13] regardless of how this turns out. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker is the
[11:18] Simons followed by Jerry Pujillo, then Marilyn Frankenstein, Frankenstein.
[11:24] The end you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[11:29] Hi, this is Ian Simmons, thanks for allowing us to speak tonight.
[11:33] I'm President of the Foundation for Civic Leadership,
[11:36] a small nonprofit that created the Moxie Center at 45 Med Auburn Street more than 20 years ago.
[11:41] I'm here tonight to respectfully reaffirm our opposition to landmarking 45 Med Auburn.
[11:45] We appreciate the work of the Cambridge Store Commission and want to thank Charlie Sullivan and the staff
[11:49] that said 3 key points remain. First, the property is already appropriately protected within
[11:54] this dark Harvard Square conservation district where changes already require a certificate
[11:58] of appropriateness. The city's current framework already provides the right kind of oversight.
[12:04] Second, while the 19th century Greek revival facade is notable, it already has adequate protection
[12:08] and the history of 45 in Auburn does not meet the threshold for historic landmark designation
[12:14] when compared to other landmarks across the city. Finally, we would, I've always been deeply
[12:19] committed to improving 45-minute Auburn as a civic hub, a landmark designation creates
[12:24] undue burdens and undue to risk for the nonprofit civic project going forward and would
[12:28] limit the amount of civic stability to continue to expand civic space on site.
[12:34] We would strongly encourage the council to keep our ability to maximize the expansion of
[12:40] civic space to help us improve civic, Cambridge civic and community life.
[12:46] Thank you so much for your time and consideration.
[12:53] Thank you, and I'm just going to call and I'm comes to my government. He's been here for a while for his role call.
[12:58] Council, look, Evan, present.
[13:02] The next speaker is Jerry Puchillo followed by Maryland Frankenstein, the Neil Miller.
[13:08] Jerry, you have the floor. Please go ahead two minutes.
[13:12] Thank you. My name is Jerry Puchillo, and I'm a consultant to the foundation for civic leadership.
[13:17] I'll keep my comments very brief, since you just heard from Ian.
[13:20] I have had decades of real estate development experience, including for 15 years, a position
[13:27] as the director of housing development for the Archdiocese of Boston. In that role,
[13:31] and others, I have acquired extensive experience in the rehab of existing historic assets,
[13:36] and I deeply appreciate the value of preserving such assets. It's partially due to that experience
[13:41] that the foundation has asked me to assist in the redevelopment of the property at 45 monoblin
[13:46] Much of my work has been focused on building low and moderate income housing for people with disabilities as well as repositioning these assets to serve ongoing strategic goals and nonprofit organizations such as the foundation for civic leadership.
[14:03] I accepted this specific assignment from the foundation because I believe they have demonstrated that they are aligned with the city schools and have worked for decades to provide civic space to enrich and build community at this location.
[14:15] As you've heard from me and they help to only deepen this commitment going forward and it would limit their resolve if you were to add further constraints on their ability to do so.
[14:28] Thank you very much.
[14:31] Thank you our next speaker is Marilyn Frankenstein followed by Neil Miller than David Helper and Marilyn you have the floor two minutes.
[14:42] Please go ahead.
[14:47] Sorry, am I unmuted?
[14:50] You are, please go ahead.
[14:52] Sorry, I couldn't see the sign.
[14:55] Marilyn Frankenstein, 40 plus year resident of West Cambridge.
[15:00] Cambridge will value by designating it a landmark. Beyond that historical concern is also that building's
[15:08] more current quarter of a century history is the democracy center, a comfortable and safe space
[15:14] for a variety of social justice organizations to meet and host events. I'm a community coalition member
[15:21] of heart, Cambridge's holistic emergency alternative response team, which developed their model
[15:27] for unarmed prices response in this space,
[15:31] and which also hosted a number of community gatherings
[15:33] at the Democracy Center.
[15:36] I've been to other organizations, educational events there,
[15:40] and art builds in that same building.
[15:43] It was an important space, not just for each individual organization,
[15:47] but for the natural, significant collaborations
[15:51] among social justice organizations.
[15:54] This is also an important part of the history
[15:56] a 45-minute urban street that I urge you to consider invoting yes to approve its landmark designation.
[16:12] Apologies. I just wanted to make a quick announcement. Some folks are having some issues with the
[16:17] stream. We're working on that, but this meeting is being recorded. So we'll have a video of it up
[16:23] immediately after. Our next speaker is Neil Miller followed by David Helperin, then Kelsey Kelter.
[16:31] Neil, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[16:36] Hi, Neil Miller, four, two, five, MassAv.
[16:39] First, I wanted to just give a note of appreciation.
[16:44] Thank you to all the folks at DPW,
[16:47] Living on MassAv.
[16:47] I could see and hear people working through the night
[16:51] for the night, into the morning,
[16:53] keeping the road clear.
[16:54] So thank you so much for everything that they do.
[16:58] I'm calling in in support of passing tonight the Cambridge Street Zone in petition,
[17:05] given the, I'm especially excited that the sites on Webster Street and Windsor Street going towards
[17:14] units where we'll now be encouraged and incentivized to turn into homes that we really need
[17:22] near jobs, near transit,
[17:26] I am disappointed that it seems like there is a push to move the
[17:35] zoning or the allowable heights on the rest of Cambridge Street down below what it even was
[17:42] already moved down to. It's stories to six stories. Everyone on this council basically says that
[17:49] the poor transit oriented development, and this was part of a long time plan to zone for
[17:56] more homes in our squares and corridors. And with the amendments, it does not do that,
[18:01] but I support passing the plan for the Webster Windsor Street sub-district to allow housing
[18:08] there. But before the amendments are voted on, it would encourage us to ask city staff,
[18:14] whether the changes on Cambridge Street will make rents higher or lower for people's
[18:20] struggling to stay in Cambridge, whether it will provide more opportunities for small businesses,
[18:26] for fewer, whether it will make Cambridge Street more or less friendly to other forms of
[18:32] transportation. I think these are important questions to ask as we're making these decisions. Thank you.
[18:38] Have a good night.
[18:41] Thank you. Our next speaker is David Halper and followed by Kelsey
[18:44] counter than Ethan Frank. David, you have two minutes. Please go ahead. Good evening David
[18:53] happened in 14 Valentine Street Unit 3. I'm also calling in to express my support for
[18:59] passing the Cambridge Street. It's owning Petition, not letting expire. Back during the multi-handly
[19:06] housing process. We were showing how under any scenario we're not going to hit our housing production
[19:12] goals and, you know, the multi-family housing would be one component of, you know, getting us back
[19:19] on track, a third something more reasonable, but the majority of our housing was projected to still
[19:26] be built on our squares and corridors. So, you know, and, you know, on our all these processes,
[19:33] we're always told, you know, well, the place that we should really be able to have something is
[20:00] And you know, continuing to water it down, we're going to have, you know, most of Cambridge Street be the same height as the neighborhoods, then, you know, it's, you know, like how is most of our housing going to be on our corridors, you know, it doesn't make sense, it's not consistent with what people have said they wanted in the past. So you know, I, you know,
[20:29] We can really, like move our with the best compromise that we can tonight,
[20:37] but, you know,
[20:40] but yeah, like we continue under every scenario where we are falling behind our housing goals,
[20:50] and we need to take that seriously, and we need to continue to find new strategies to move that forward,
[20:58] And you know, to get the housing, we built both market rate and affordable as
[21:03] inclusionary and you know, every tool in the toolbox.
[21:06] Thank you.
[21:09] Thank you.
[21:09] Our next speaker is Kelsey Keltzer, followed by Ethan Frank, then Dana Bullister.
[21:16] Kelsey, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[21:21] Excellent.
[21:21] Distinguished City Councilors, thank you for pivoting to a virtual setting amid the New England
[21:26] Snowfall.
[21:27] My name is Kelsey Kelter, and I'm a resident of 71 Thorndike Street in Cambridge.
[21:32] I'm here to share my strong support for Policy Order 2, regarding the incorporation
[21:37] of plant-based solutions into the Sustainable Cambridge Initiative, which aligns with the plant-based treaty.
[21:43] In a professional capacity, I am dedicated and a dedicated environmentalist and sustainability consultant,
[21:48] specializing in enterprise-wide corporate decarbonization.
[21:51] As I volunteer, I co-lead the Sierra clubs of Massachusetts Energy Justice team, and I am a nine-year
[21:57] vegan for the planet, going back to my undergrad at Boston College.
[22:01] At the nexus of sustainability, environmentalism, and equitable justice, sits the plant-based
[22:06] treaty.
[22:07] My fellow campaigners will share more detail of the campaign in due course, but I am here to
[22:13] speak on the environmental effects of plant-based defaults, which can be included in the city's
[22:17] plant-based food strategy for events.
[22:21] Defaults make plant-based options the standard no-action choice with meat and daily of dairy available upon request.
[22:28] Studies have shown that serving plant-based food as the default option decreases meat consumption by up to 87%.
[22:35] Thus reducing foods GHD emissions by an average of 40% and the water footprint therein by 24%.
[22:42] percent. This behavioral nudging technique increases sustainable, healthy, healthier eating,
[22:49] while preserving freedom of choice. Thus, serving meals that work for all dietary restrictions,
[22:55] reduces overhead and food waste within our boundaries. Cambridge can use plant-based defaults
[23:00] and it's effective tool at the events to meet our carbon reduction goals while saving on food costs
[23:06] and improving health and inclusivity in the community. This will help Cambridge reach its net zero
[23:11] she emissions by 2020, 2050. I asked this council to formally adopt
[23:15] potency water too, and I thank you to the councilors thus forward who have endorsed
[23:20] this petition, and for the whole council for considering the adoption of the plant-based
[23:24] treaty for Cambridge.
[23:27] Thank you, our next speaker is Ethan Frank,
[23:29] followed by Dana Bullister, then Jason House. Ethan, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[23:38] Hello. Can you hear me?
[23:42] Yes, we can. Please go ahead. My name is Ethan. I live at 632 MassAv and the NVTA's
[23:52] cancellation of their L-Wi-3 development plan reminds me why it's so important that we use all of
[24:02] space we have available as efficiently as possible, which is just one of the many reasons
[24:10] that we should upzone Cambridge Street tonight.
[24:14] Thank you.
[24:21] Thank you.
[24:21] Our next speaker is Dana Ballister.
[24:26] Dana has not joined.
[24:27] We will go to Jason Alves followed by Jim Monteverde, then Taylor Cross.
[24:33] Jason, you have two minutes.
[24:34] Please go ahead.
[24:37] Hi, this is Jason Alves, Executive Director of these Cambridge Business Association,
[24:42] 544 Cambridge Street.
[24:45] I want to just speak on the Cambridge Street Zoning and the communication tonight.
[24:50] So just a thanks to Council of Newell and I'm here to D.C. for recommending what I think is a pretty some good change.
[25:00] The communication tonight, so just a thanks to Councillor Nolan and Mayor Sediki for recommending what I think is a pretty some some good changes and it makes for a nice compromise on the Cambridge Street zone in petition.
[25:18] I think for us it's important that the the website of intersection, it's something we've been advocating for close to a decade now.
[25:26] I think there was a missed opportunity because of some previous zoning, but I think getting
[25:30] that up zone there as a transition transition into the point in yards area of someable
[25:35] and union square can really help create some good transit oriented housing development that
[25:42] doesn't really cause much displacement.
[25:45] Think the reduction along Cambridge Street to six stories is a nice compromise.
[25:51] I think it gets in line with some of the recommendations of the R Camus Street study.
[25:57] You know, Camus Street is basically, has been up zone recently to six stories, and this kind
[26:03] of refines that zoning to make it more manageable for the neighborhood.
[26:11] So I think that that's a nice compromise, and I think we're supportive of all this knowing
[26:16] that you will be revisiting the ground floor commercial requirements and a subsequent petition.
[26:23] That is very, very important to the district and something that we want to see happen.
[26:30] I guess quickly. So, hope you can pass this tonight. Again, I think it's a good compromise
[26:36] that can hopefully make a lot of different parties that have concerns and hopes for
[26:42] me street and bring everybody in line. So thank you all very much.
[26:47] Thank you. Our next speaker is Jim Monteverde. Followed by Taylor Cross then and it's holy bore a soft. Jim you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[27:05] Jim Monteverde if you can unmute yourself you have the floor two minutes.
[27:09] Sorry. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Jim Monteverde of 12 oak street in mid square. I asked that you let the Cambridge street zoning petition expire and require the be revised with
[27:20] benefit of a robust open public review process.
[27:25] I support the Nolan Sediki Amendment to change the height limit in the new district
[27:30] C.A.M. eight to six stories and ask that that same limit applied to the new district
[27:36] C.A.M. ten in the heart of image square. I suggest that the proposed design review thresholds
[27:44] of 75,000 square feet for residential projects be reduced so that most if not all of new
[27:50] development along Cambridge Street require review by the planning board to force their design
[27:56] competence. The zoning proposal should also be revised to allow existing retail uses to
[28:02] continue in any new construction to maintain the retail character and vibrancy of the street.
[28:09] Please let the zoning petition expire so that it can be improved to reflect the public
[28:14] to vision for Cambridge Street through public review and comment.
[28:19] Thank you.
[28:23] Thank you, our next speaker is Taylor Cross,
[28:26] followed by Anatolia Borosov, then Hannah Roach.
[28:30] Taylor, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[28:35] Good evening.
[28:35] My name is Taylor Cross,
[28:37] and my address is 1315 Harvard Yard Male Center Cambridge,
[28:41] and I'm here in strong supportive Cambridge
[28:43] endorsing the plant-based treaty and policy order number two.
[28:46] I'm a lifelong classical ballet dancer and a first year pre-med student at Harvard, planning to pursue cardiovascular surgery.
[28:54] Through years of intensive ballet training and internships with the Vascular Surgeons,
[28:58] I became deeply interested in the intersection of nutrition, chronic disease and preventative medicine.
[29:04] That journey led me to study Whole Foods Plant-based Nutrition and to see firsthand how powerful it can be for long-term health.
[29:12] We are living in a chronic disease epidemic.
[29:15] heart disease, diabetes, and many cancers are now the leading causes of death and disability
[29:21] in the U.S. These are largely preventable conditions. Yet our health care system spends
[29:26] trillions of dollars treating symptoms rather than addressing root causes. One of the most
[29:33] effective evidence-based tools we have is also one of the simplest food. A whole foods plant-based
[29:39] diet has been shown to prevent, treat, and in many cases reverse chronic disease. Leading physician
[29:45] and researchers, including many within the Cambridge and Harvard Medical Community, have demonstrated
[29:50] that plant-based diets can lower cholesterol, improve insulin sensitivity, and significantly
[29:55] reduce cardiovascular risk. What I find especially meaningful about the—
[30:00] Is a clear, responsible step in the right direction. Thank you so much for your leadership and for considering this important vote.
[30:09] Our next speaker is Annette Holi, Borisov, followed by Hannah Roach, then Rosa Diaz Rivera, Annette Holi, two minutes.
[30:21] Thank you. My name is Annette Holi, Borisov. I live at 153 Webster Avenue, and I'm speaking about the proposed amendment to the Cambridge Zoningordinates near Cambridge Street,
[30:30] which I am strongly in support of. I'd argue that it is the responsibility of any city to balance
[30:35] its ability to provide housing, services, and job opportunities to its residents. There are
[30:40] currently many great reasons to live in Cambridge and frankly, it's unlikely that people will
[30:44] stop wanting to move to and remain in Cambridge. Between the vibrant communities, job opportunities,
[30:50] and being a part of the extensive Boston metropolitan area, populations will likely continue to
[30:54] grow in Cambridge. And to handle this transition gracefully and equitably, it is important that
[30:59] provide enough housing to meet their demand.
[31:02] The exceedingly low vacancy rate of apartments in high housing and rental prices indicate
[31:05] that despite the historical effort, Cambridge still lags behind.
[31:09] When this occurs, the wealthiest that can handle these prices are made in the rest are excluded
[31:13] from the Cambridge community.
[31:15] I think an important part of a graceful transition to demands that higher population brings comes
[31:20] with recognizing that housing and transportation are needed in tandem.
[31:24] As a result, the proposed upselling of Cambridge Street serves as a prime candidate as an effective
[31:27] to provide housing due to its accessibility to means of public transport.
[31:32] While there can and should be discussion about if these zoning changes in themselves are adequate
[31:37] to promote the development of housing, to me there's little doubt that this is a step in the
[31:42] direction of building more housing in Cambridge. Thus for that reason I am in support of the proposed
[31:47] establishment of New Zoning District on Cambridge Street, as a necessary albeit not sufficient
[31:53] set to allow Cambridge to equitably meet housing demand. Thank you.
[31:57] Thank you, our next speaker is Hannah Roach. Hannah, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[32:06] Hi, this is Hannah Roach. I live at 20 Orchard Street in Cambridge, and I am a master student of nutrition at Tufts,
[32:11] and volunteer for the local plant-based community campaign. And I am testifying to ask you to vote for your
[32:16] verbally on policy order number two. As a volunteer, I wanted to use this time to talk a bit about the
[32:26] through the initiative that brings food systems into the climate crisis conversation.
[32:31] Plant-based diets are proven to be the most environmentally sustainable and can also be the
[32:35] healthiest diets for us. Currently, 65 other cities worldwide have endorsed the plant-based
[32:42] treaty with campaigns spreading across every continent. One notable recent endorsement that
[32:48] I would like to mention is from the City of Belém in Brazil. Belém is located in the Amazon
[32:54] where mass deforestation has been ceaselessly occurring, often illegally, in order to raise
[33:00] and feed cattle and meet the rising demands for meat exports to the global north.
[33:05] They recognize the need for a plant-based treaty, and so should we.
[33:09] Cambridge already deeply acknowledges the climate crisis, encircled for the health of those
[33:14] who live here, so it logically follows that the city would join the squabble coalition
[33:18] and promote plant-based eating.
[33:20] Also, I'd like to clarify that this policy order does not take away any existing food options from any city resident.
[33:27] It only aims to increase accessibility and education regarding plant-based foods and diets.
[33:32] On top of that, the local plant-based 3D team is here to provide any assistance the city may need when implementing this new policy order.
[33:40] Thank you for your time counselors, and I again ask for all of you to vote in support of informally-adowed policy order number two.
[33:47] Thank you.
[33:49] Our next speaker is Rosa Diaz Rivera followed by N.J. Park, then Carl Schmepper. Rosa, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[34:05] Council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Rosa Diaz Rivera, and I have lived in 50 Cambridge Park Drive for two and a half years.
[34:14] I am here to ask the Council to vote favorably on policy order number 2.
[34:19] Research shows that shifting towards plant-based eating delivers real economic benefits
[34:24] for households and governments, reducing reliance on animal agricultural globally would allow
[34:30] us to produce enough additional food to feed hundreds of millions of people.
[35:00] Of dollars each year in healthcare costs. While a broader shift towards a plant-based diet could save up to 250 billion annually and prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths linked to chronic disease.
[35:13] Importantly, plant-based diets are not more expensive for households, that is often assumed.
[35:18] Oxford University research found that vegan diets are the most affordable, cutting food costs
[35:23] by up to one third, a separate study confirmed that plant-based consumers spend less
[35:29] on food than omnivores overall.
[35:31] These findings directly challenge the idea that healthy, sustainable eating is financially
[35:36] out of reach for many people.
[35:38] For a city-like Cambridge, where cost of living is a major concern, this evidence highlights
[35:43] the importance of public information campaigns that promote plant-based eating as a budget-friendly
[35:48] option. But clearly communicating the financial benefits, Cambridge can empower residents to
[35:54] make choices that stretch household budgets and reduce long-term healthcare costs. Public education
[36:00] is a low-cost, high-impact tool that benefits everyone in the community. Thank you so much for your time.
[36:08] Our next speaker is N.J. Park followed by Carl Schmeck, Pepper, the Nina Wu.
[36:15] N.J., you have the floor of two minutes. Please go ahead.
[36:26] Good evening, Councillor. My name is N.J., and I'm a Cambridge resident at 332
[36:30] Broadway and an MBA student at Northeastern University.
[36:33] Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.
[36:36] I'm here not as a policy expert, but as some of who comes from a long lineage of
[36:40] Korean home cooks and professional chefs.
[36:42] Food is how my family show love.
[36:45] My uncle owns a Korean sushi restaurant in Austin called Opusushi, where we serve classic sushi
[36:50] and popular Korean dishes.
[36:52] Like many immigrant own restaurants, it's built on tradition, pride, and hard work.
[36:58] At the same time, I've seen how traditional Korean cuisine can unintentionally exclude people.
[37:03] Many staple dishes like Jigae stews and even kimchi rely on animal-based ingredients.
[37:08] When vegan friends or family die in a Korean restaurant, their options are often limited.
[37:14] They're there, but not fully included.
[37:17] I don't see plant-based treaty as an attack on tradition.
[37:20] I see it as an invitation, an invitation for creativity, evolution, and inclusion.
[37:27] This policy encourages restaurant across cuisine to expand who they serve,
[37:31] and gives chef the space to interpret tradition, while responding to today's climate realities.
[37:36] It also supports local businesses, like Cambridge's own Moments on Kitchen.
[37:42] While they're not exclusively plant-based Korean business, they're catering model
[37:46] allow them to adopt menus more flexibly than many brick and mortar restaurants, making
[37:50] them a valuable resource for individuals and city-sponsored events, looking to include plant-based
[37:56] Korean options.
[37:58] Cambridge had long led on climate and equity, and I urge you to vote favorably on policy
[38:05] order number two for the climate for local businesses and for more inclusive food culture. Thank you.
[38:14] Our next speaker is Carl Schlockpepper followed by Nina Wu, the young Kim. Carl, you have two
[38:22] minutes. Please go ahead.
[38:30] My name is Carl Schlocker. I live in 249 third street in East Cambridge,
[38:35] And I'd like to speak today on the Cambridge Street Building petition.
[38:41] I urge the Council to please adopt the Cambridge Street Building petition,
[38:47] increase the density along our squares and corridors,
[38:50] is something that's critical to meeting the city's goals,
[38:55] on housing reduction, making housing more affordable for everybody,
[38:58] and environmentally by making it so people are able to live
[39:01] close to public transportation and a less current dependent.
[39:09] Further we do this in the heights of this own inclusion via mistake,
[39:13] the women how many people would be able to live here, which would
[39:16] limit how many people would be able to have cheaper housing.
[39:22] So I urge the council to adopt the donation
[39:25] with no further questions.
[39:28] Thank you.
[39:30] Your next speaker is Nina Wu.
[39:35] We're at speaker number 22 for those waiting.
[39:37] Nina, you have two minutes.
[39:40] Please go ahead.
[39:44] Good evening, city counselors.
[40:01] I am a first student at Harvard College and the co-president of Harvard Undergrab campus. I am here to ask you to vote favorably on policy order number two and endorse the plant-based treaty.
[40:12] Many others are speaking on environmental and health benefits that come up promoting plant-based sites.
[40:18] But I would like to use opportunity to speak on what I believe to be the greatest and the benefit of all.
[40:23] promoting plant-based food allows us to shift towards a more compassionate
[40:26] free system through improving animal welfare.
[40:30] An animal agriculture, sentient animals, each with their own personality and lived experiences,
[40:35] are viewed as nothing more than a surgery food. Their entire lives are predetermined
[40:40] beings to an end. We're victimized animals being victimized animals being so hidden behind this industrial
[40:46] system, even the kindness people have trouble viewing the ones in their place and in the fridge
[40:51] as they don't settle. This policy order of morning and face guides helps not only protect the planet
[40:57] but also animal welfare. Thank you for your time counselors and I again ask you to book
[41:02] by Ripley on policy order number two. Thank you. Our next speaker is Young Kim followed by
[41:10] K.C. Karenfield and Sarah Suzuki. Young, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[41:18] You understand the knowledge to it,
[41:22] people are based on laying the chemicals with corridors on intuition.
[41:27] Because when stuff descriptions are accepted without the independent verification,
[41:33] the public record, the causes were all just from less selective oversight to rubber stamping.
[41:41] And that creates a really institutional risk.
[41:44] If you both like to, they are in the Cambridge field called Corridor Zone in Petition and so on, together with the Mass Avenue amendment already adopted,
[41:55] we shall always have some conflict.
[41:58] Both Corridor maps and descriptive texts will enter the zone where the results were implemented by the CDC.
[42:08] I'm supposed to overlay such as the mass having overlay, and the overlay, and the replays,
[42:16] means that say five and 30 districts will also be left gambling in the cold.
[42:23] They say consistency is the sign of small money, but in the only ordinance, because this
[42:29] The first thing is the background and must be verified each time on your non-manious introduced.
[42:36] That particular has been neglected for far too long, and the Cambridge Street corridor may be
[42:44] where those of cumulative risk finally destabilized the zoning ordinance.
[42:50] One practical consequence is the rapid up zoning allowing polar project and sub-right is now
[42:58] According to incentives for city, you were treated to give the perfect affordable developers
[43:05] of a competitive edge or market developers.
[43:10] One concrete example, even with the main net sense, I could not find in the engineering
[43:17] materials, I could not rely on the interest, but put a spirit boundaries, and say any
[43:26] Thank you, Kim Apologies. Your time is expired. Please email the remainder of your comment. Our next speaker is KC Karen Phil. KC you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[43:46] KC you're on the phone. You need to unmute. I believe it's star six to unmute on the phone.
[44:03] All right. There you go. There you go.
[44:05] Okay, I'm so sorry for that.
[44:07] Thank you.
[44:07] My name is Cotton Phil Casey.
[44:09] Although I'm currently a resident, I've had
[44:11] in stack, crowed in Boston.
[44:13] I am a longtime Cambridge community member
[44:16] through family work, organizing,
[44:20] and whatnot.
[44:21] I am speaking in support of the landmark
[44:23] designation for 45 Mont Arban Street,
[44:27] the Nathaniel Stickney House.
[44:28] I'm not only because of its 200 years
[44:30] it's historical significance for Cambridge,
[44:33] but because this is home to the democracy center for a quarter of a century, and I may not be
[44:41] as elegant as my peers and the former speakers, but I just speak from my heart. I have personally
[44:47] been, I guess, the participant and an organizer of many gatherings and initiatives that have been
[44:54] housed and took in place in the former democracy center. We, as far as I know,
[45:00] Great historical significance. We saw everything from standing rock, black lives matter, trans rights, and these are things that have become a very important part of the history in not just our community, but across many communities. And so I ask that you please consider supporting our request for historical designation.
[45:23] And I am very grateful to thank you, Council members, for your time and for your commitment.
[45:34] And I hope that you can remember to consider how important this is to the people, not just in our communities,
[45:43] that Cambridge has such a commitment to...
[45:48] Apologies, Karen Phil, if you can please email the remainder of your comment to City Council at CambridgeMade.gov.
[45:55] Our next speaker is Sarah Suzuki.
[46:00] I do not see Sarah and the Zoom. We're going to go to James Zall, followed by William Hughes, then Trudy Goodman.
[46:08] James, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[46:13] Thank you. This is James Zall, 203, Pemberton Street.
[46:16] Since 2022, zoning along Cambridge Street was the subject of community meeting surveys, hearings, lots of public comment and online discussions.
[46:28] People who participated in these efforts got a chance to contribute to the resulting zoning.
[46:35] Each participant did not, yet, nor should they get, a set of zoning amendments that exactly match what they asked for.
[46:42] The claims that the results before you is somehow not legitimate and needs to be done over merely
[46:51] demonstrates the fact that Cambridge Street and probably every other street in neighborhood
[46:56] is home to some residents who don't need or don't want more housing in their area.
[47:03] Citywide surveys and the past several elections indicate that the majority of residents
[47:08] It's recognized the harmful consequences of our long running shortage of housing.
[47:14] Even if the requested doover of public engagement is accomplished quickly, the slow start-up
[47:21] time for new housing and Cambridge ensures that our housing crisis will be no less severe
[47:27] when the next version of this zoning proposal would come here for a vote.
[47:33] Please do not toss aside all the work that has been done so far and proceed to enact
[47:38] the Cambridge Street zoning tonight. Thank you.
[47:43] You are next speaker is William Hughes.
[47:48] William, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[47:50] Followed by Trudy Goodman. William, you have two minutes.
[47:56] My name is Liam Hughes. William Hughes, and I live at 20
[48:00] orcher Street in North Cambridge.
[48:02] So I came here today to voice my support for policy order number two,
[48:05] and specifically to discuss the environmental need for a plant-based treaty.
[48:09] I've been masters degree in mechanical engineering and I work as a mechanical energy systems designer
[48:15] where I've dedicated my life to decarbonizing buildings throughout Massachusetts.
[48:20] I chose this career path because I deeply care about taking action to combat the climate crisis
[48:25] and when I learned about the devastating environmental impact of animal agriculture, that's when I had to adopt a plant-based diet.
[48:34] Our food system accounts for about 1-3rd of all greenhouse gas emissions, which is larger than even the transportation sector.
[48:44] So shifting towards a plant-based diet is a huge component of addressing climate change.
[48:52] When it comes to the decarbonization, every little bit counts and similarly, when we choose to purchase plant-based products or meals instead of animal products,
[49:02] we're doing our part to mitigate the demand for environmentally harmful animal products and
[49:07] to show our grocery stores, restaurants, and cafes that we are, that we as consumers
[49:13] want sustainable plant-based foods.
[49:16] I know the city of Cambridge has counterduction goals already in place and by enacting
[49:22] policy order number two, and formally endorsing the plant-based treaty, the city will become
[49:26] further aligned with sustainable best practices.
[50:00] It's true. Goodman. Followed by Adrian Apprat, then Mark Keyblur, treaty. You have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[50:09] Good evening. I live. Can you hear me, okay? We can. Please go ahead.
[50:14] are the 1221 Cambridge Street Eomans Square cast two apartments in
[50:19] Eomans Square. I've lived there for 33 years now. There's a lot of
[50:24] misinformation floating around here this evening. I'm not going to
[50:28] necessarily address that, but here's what I do want to address.
[50:31] I'm going to building this 15 stories high. Down this tree for me is,
[50:36] Miller's River, which I believe is 18 stories high.
[50:39] There are higher rises in this area already, those high rises basically the people who
[50:45] live in those high rises are section 8, tenants are voucher tenants.
[50:50] New high rises will not help people like me and the people who live in Miller's river.
[50:56] For people to believe that is misinformation.
[51:00] Inclusionary will not assist people predominantly who are 11 to 20 AMI which is the people in
[51:08] building. There are 126 units in this building, most of these people are low income. They will
[51:14] not be able to get into these high rises and into the inclusionary that some of these people
[51:19] are suggesting. Here more importantly is the people in this neighborhood have not been given
[51:25] an opportunity to discuss any of this, including the merchants who have long-term businesses
[51:31] here in Inman Square. So everybody who wants to ram this through, what would be the problem if we
[51:37] Just a couple of months and heard from everybody and found out just what people in this neighborhood want.
[51:44] Instead of people trying to ram this down everyone's throat.
[51:48] Please put a gender item three on hold.
[51:50] So the people in this neighborhood have the opportunity to speak about what they need because we actually live here.
[51:58] Thank you very much and have a very good evening.
[52:02] Thank you, our next speaker is Adriana Pratt, followed by Mark Keibler, then Marley Meyer.
[52:10] Adriana, please go ahead, two minutes.
[52:18] Adriana, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor.
[52:23] Yes.
[52:24] Hello.
[52:26] Good evening.
[52:27] Council members.
[52:28] I am Adriana Pratt at 543 Patnam Avenue, and I'm here to strongly support policy order
[52:33] number two, the plant-based treaty.
[52:35] I am an artist, scientist, mother, immigrant, and my passion is to inspire urgently needed action
[52:43] for the human-made environmental crisis through my art and through the artist's collective
[52:48] I found it I3C.
[52:50] I do not need to speak about the environmental and climate crisis that we are experiencing.
[52:56] When seven of the nine planetary boundaries have been surpassed, I am an agricultural
[53:01] is a major contributor to this in addition to the cruelty inflicted to species that never agreed
[53:07] to become a human commodity. As it has been eloquently described before me, a clan-based diet
[53:14] can prevent and even reverse chronic diseases, so it is dramatically better for the health
[53:20] of all of our community's members. I would have loved it if my daughter had had more plan-based
[53:26] food options when she was at Sierra Lees years ago.
[53:31] In the time when our federal government is pushing us into a dystopian world, having you
[53:36] indoors the plant-based treaty in Cambridge will be a tremendous win for the
[53:41] environmental cost and exemplary leadership and priest president for other cities and states and
[53:48] world regions. Thank you for all your ongoing work on climate issues and for embracing
[53:54] the clan-based reading today to contribute to a
[53:57] livable future for all populations on our
[54:00] cherished planet.
[54:04] Thank you, our next speaker is Mark Keebler,
[54:06] followed by Merley Meyer, then Susanne Bleey.
[54:09] Mark, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[54:15] All right, I think I'm on me the day off.
[54:17] So good evening, counselor is my name is Mark Keebler,
[54:19] and I live at 52 Fort Street in East Cambridge,
[54:22] and thank you very much for your time,
[54:24] and all the work that you put into
[54:25] He's doing proposals, I'm speaking today to strongly urge you to support the Cambridge Street
[54:32] rezoning proposal and to move it forward, so this city has spent years engaging residents
[55:00] Issue facing the city through residents surveys. And there is no way to address this without making more housing with this ordinance.
[55:10] The city would be following through on its commitments and engaging with residents longstanding concerns.
[55:15] And in particular, this proposal focuses both where it makes the most sense, while major corridors, your transit, jobs, and neighborhoods, businesses.
[55:27] So, this proposal height is not just a developer giveaway, it's tied directly to public benefits.
[55:33] Like active ground floor uses better street design, inclusionary housing.
[55:37] So that means that new development has to contribute to the daily life on Cambridge Street to make things more walkable,
[55:44] at more support for local businesses and the greater potential for sustainable livings.
[55:50] So we often talk about equity, affordability and sustainability as our values in Cambridge,
[55:55] and if you don't, enable housing and places like this, places with transit jobs and services,
[56:02] available these values remain to be just talk so this wouldn't
[56:06] it says it's all to everything but it's a concrete step in the right direction
[56:10] that aligns our zoning with our stated values. Thank you.
[56:16] Thank you our next speaker is Marlee Meyer. Marlee you have two minutes please
[56:20] go ahead.
[56:24] I'm Marlee Meyer and Dana Street. Well I remember reducing
[56:28] heights on Cambridge Street to six stories excluding in men's square. It doesn't
[56:33] include other egregious issues. Please let Cambridge Street expire for a more
[56:38] comprehensive urban plan. Expiration often pointed out by Councilor McGuvern is
[56:44] not the final word. A continuation is not re-ledicating, but a more efficient
[56:49] consolidating of amendments, possibly even helping central square.
[56:54] Forcing this petition ignores the unresolved issues, including evictions of residents,
[56:59] small businesses, labs as of right, insufficient open space, setbacks, parking, residential and
[57:07] commercial projects should have the same design and planning board review at 20,000 square feet.
[57:14] Inclusionary is unpredictable and unqualifiable, and there is no mention of affordable housing at all.
[57:21] Vote now, fix later, leaves this plan wanting in its piecemeal state.
[57:27] A pro developer counselor has been reshaping Cambridge into the lightless playgrounds of this super rich, except for some tone deaf housing efforts, passed as of right without compromise, and that's the problem without compromise.
[57:44] Such as the case of the Harvard Square,
[57:47] a historic district, where a proposed or initially proposed
[57:53] residential 12-tower project was proposed
[57:57] for the democracy sector and on a small footprint,
[58:05] it would be essentially a dorm.
[58:07] Strict of size, shape, and design oversight.
[58:10] the CHC had on landmarked because of its importance. We continue to see the council's arbitrary
[58:17] number crunching in all upzoning without nuance. Nose is you need nuance. Do better think holistically
[58:28] about ramifications. This is not an all or nothing for a formula against me. There has to be a pathway.
[58:36] Thank you.
[58:38] Thank you.
[58:39] Our next speaker is Susan Blee, followed by Timothy Koski, then Ruth Feffer.
[58:45] Susan, you have two minutes.
[58:46] Please go ahead.
[58:50] Thank you.
[58:50] Suzanne Blee, a five-filer place.
[58:53] First, please landmark the democracy center, not only because it's really important, historically
[58:58] in Harvard Square, but because also the democracy of this country is really under threat.
[59:04] and this has been a critically important place within the city of Cambridge and within the
[59:09] area. Secondly, on the Cambridge Street Obsoning, my first choice would be to let this expire.
[59:17] At the same time, I want to thank Mayor Siddiqui and Councillor Nolan for bringing parts of this
[59:22] down to six stories. At the same time, going forward, we have to realize that this is going to bring
[59:28] or lease terminations, and that it's unlikely to have any affordable housing, particularly with the
[59:35] Patrick Barrett lawsuit in play. I, for once, actually agreed with something that Neil Miller said,
[59:42] which is, we need to find out if this is going to make rents lower or higher. And my feeling
[59:47] based on what we're seeing around the city is that this is not only going to cause people to
[59:51] lose their leases but also will be making rents higher. I urge you if this if the amendment does
[59:59] pass.
[1:00:00] We all know that we can do better and good design generally is no more expensive than really bad design.
[1:00:06] So I urge you to let this lab at the labs that have the same time, I think, Mayor Siddiqui and Councillor Nolan and happy snow day.
[1:00:18] Thank you. Our next speaker is Timothy Koski, followed by Ruth Feffer than Lee Faris. Timothy, please go ahead. You have two minutes.
[1:00:29] Hi, my name is Timothy Koski.
[1:00:33] I live on 97 Elmwood Street in Cambridge.
[1:00:38] I'm here to ask the counselors to get support
[1:00:44] to the Cambridge Street Obsoning Amendment.
[1:00:49] From what I have read, it seems deeply moderate
[1:00:54] in scope and but we do desperately need more housing and more building in the city.
[1:01:06] And so I would hope that the counselors would support this event. Thank you
[1:01:18] for those waiting.
[1:01:19] We are at speaker number 34 of 65 speakers. Our next speaker is Ruth Feffer followed by
[1:01:27] the fairest and Zion Sharon. Ruth, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:01:37] My name is city counselors. My name is Ruth Feffer, and I'm a high school senior who
[1:01:42] was lived at 171 Harvey Street for my entire life. I'm here to support policy order
[1:01:48] number two, the plant-based treaty. I've loved this city since I was little. While I grew
[1:01:55] up here, I learned about the extreme and widespread violence towards animals involved in
[1:02:00] food system. As a pacifist, I found this cruelty unconscionable and I was inspired to become
[1:02:07] an advocate. Last year, I organized the Ed for Impact Campaign to add plant-based options to
[1:02:14] restaurants and Cambridge. I'd like to thank the city for supporting me, including some of you
[1:02:20] in this meeting. It's easy to feel despair when I think of the billions of animals struggling
[1:02:26] every day, but Cambridge's longstanding commitment to environmentalism gives me hope.
[1:02:33] As I go off to college, I plan to keep advocating for the world that I believe in.
[1:02:37] I dream of someday living in a country with a non-violent food system that's based on bringing
[1:02:44] communities together and building that food system starts right here with a plant-based treaty.
[1:02:52] Thank you for your time and for considering this important policy order.
[1:02:58] Thank you. Our next speaker is Lee Ferris, followed by Science Sharing, then Helen Walker.
[1:03:05] Lee, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:03:12] Good evening. Lee Ferris from Norfolk Street in the port. I'm speaking for the Cambridge Residence Alliance.
[1:03:19] We encourage counselors to vote for the Nolan Amendment for six floors.
[1:03:23] However, the Cambridge Residence Alliance still thinks the petition should expire, followed by a brief
[1:03:29] community process on the proposed zoning, and then all the remaining issues, including the
[1:03:34] act of ground floor requirement, can be resolved and presented in one comprehensive petition.
[1:03:41] It is the wrong approach to conduct a planning study then design the zoning, but not allow residents
[1:03:48] and businesses to discuss that zoning, except during public comment to the council.
[1:03:54] Our biggest concern is not knowing the amount of inclusionary housing estimated to result from
[1:04:00] the zoning. We asked the council that council required those inclusionary estimates before passing
[1:04:07] the zoning and state-to-city staff that those estimates must be produced for every future zoning
[1:04:12] petition. We believe that the proposed zoning will result in six floor buildings with
[1:04:19] not even active ground floor and not having inclusionary units. That could be fixed, but it would
[1:04:27] take another petition to do that. We ask the council to delay implementation. If the Cambridge
[1:05:00] Will require active ground floor space is passed.
[1:05:06] In summary, we ask councillors to vote in favor of the
[1:05:09] Nolan amendment for six floors and to not support the petition as a whole. Some outstanding issues
[1:05:15] that could be addressed include not allowing labs as a right increased project review requirements
[1:05:22] increased open space and street carry requirements and through requirements for active ground floor
[1:05:28] Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Zion sharing. Followed by Helen Walker, then Brennan
[1:05:36] Waters. Zion, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:05:41] Hi Zion, Sharon, for when Washington Street. I am calling and asking the council to let the
[1:05:49] Cambridge Street zoning petition expire. I do think that the amendments being proposed would
[1:05:54] better. However, while looking at the amendment, I still have not content with the lack of addressing
[1:06:03] zoning issues when it comes to people with disabilities and accessibility, whether it be proper
[1:06:07] loading zones or handicapped spaces. I brought this up several times and shared the story that I had
[1:06:13] with my mother who recently passed the cancer and her experiences getting in and out of vehicles
[1:06:20] and how difficult that was. And I think that the council had taken the time to make amendments
[1:06:26] when it came to high up buildings, but not properly addressed disabled residents is really
[1:06:32] telling to the priorities the council is pushing. Additionally, I'd like to state that if this is
[1:06:39] truly about a housing crisis and we're working on making sure more residents come live here,
[1:06:45] having labs by right does the exact opposite,
[1:06:48] encourages space that may not even be used properly,
[1:06:51] due to the fact that right now,
[1:06:53] about a third of labs facing the greater Boston area is vacant.
[1:06:57] So overall, I do think that the amendment
[1:06:59] would be better for the zoning,
[1:07:01] but I am requesting that people,
[1:07:04] that counselors allow it to expire
[1:07:05] and that they focus on priorities such as accessibility
[1:07:09] and potentially reigning in the lab space.
[1:07:13] Thanks.
[1:07:14] Thank you, our next speaker is Helen Walker, followed by Brennan Waters, then Halley trial.
[1:07:22] Helen, you have two minutes.
[1:07:24] Please go ahead.
[1:07:28] Sorry about that.
[1:07:28] Helen, if you can try to unmute yourself now, you have two minutes.
[1:07:31] Can you hear me now?
[1:07:33] Yes.
[1:07:33] Please go ahead.
[1:07:35] Helen Walker 43, many in Street.
[1:07:37] Thank you for the chance to speak about the Cambridge Street zoning petition.
[1:07:40] For just thanks to Councillor Nolan and Mayor Sadiki for their amendments, of course the
[1:07:46] results of the study involving significant taxpayer funds and working group time should
[1:07:51] not be set aside without a legitimate process.
[1:07:55] And thanks for highlighting many for further action to protect ground floor business, especially
[1:07:59] small business.
[1:08:01] But there's more to do.
[1:08:03] On December 15, Council voted to reduce the maximum height of inventory from 10 stories
[1:08:08] to eight stories, hasn't happened, hasn't in this agenda package? When is that going to happen?
[1:08:15] There's no zoning map or descriptive text. How do we verify the boundaries of Cambridge 812 and 15?
[1:08:23] And where the amendments the community keeps asking for, inclusionary units required at over four
[1:08:28] stories, same as seeing one district. Rear setbacks over five feet. New and existing residents
[1:08:36] staring into each other's bedroom's ten feet away will be miserable.
[1:08:40] These will not be home for casting routes and raising families in.
[1:08:46] Open space, comparable to all other residential districts at least 15 percent,
[1:08:51] and should be mostly green and that grade. Remember the planning board comment.
[1:08:56] No open space will need to a really crappy urban streetscape.
[1:09:00] Projects with you at a lower threshold, all projects over four stories or 20,000 square feet.
[1:09:06] accessible drop-off and delivery. As I say more to do, and thank you for your efforts.
[1:09:19] I guess that was the end. We will go to Brennan Waters, followed by Halley Trial,
[1:09:27] then Laurie Sheffield.
[1:09:36] Brennan, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:09:41] Hi. Thank you. Brennan Waters. I leave a 14 Remington Street. I previously lived at
[1:09:52] street. Housing is supposed to come to the Cambridge and I really love to stay in the city long
[1:09:56] term and hopefully raise a family here. But, today it's...
[1:10:00] I want to voice my support for increased housing in the Cambridge Street. Housing is so expensive, the Cambridge and I really love to stay in the city long term and hopefully raise a family here.
[1:10:11] But today it's hard to envision it with housing prices so high in the premium of staying in Cambridge being so large.
[1:10:19] More housing will help drive down costs for everyone, for young people who want to join the Great Job Market.
[1:10:27] also for family to want to stay here long-term and help residents like me who want to contribute to
[1:10:32] Cambridge, both life and Cambridge, be able to stay in Cambridge.
[1:10:35] This is a great opportunity to build more housing on underutilized lots, as well as
[1:10:39] can contribute to increased density in our quarters.
[1:10:44] Thank you very much.
[1:10:54] Apologies, I'm having a little delay with my internet.
[1:10:58] Our next speaker is Halley Trial, followed by Lori Sheffield, then Camilla Elviss.
[1:11:05] Howie, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[1:11:09] Hello.
[1:11:10] Thank you for the opportunity to speak here.
[1:11:12] And thank you to the counselors for bringing this proposal to
[1:11:18] Upzone Cambridge Street forward.
[1:11:20] Really appreciate this as well as the community engagement that led to it.
[1:11:25] I'm one of the officers of the MIT graduate student council,
[1:11:29] which represents over 6,000 graduate students living
[1:11:32] you know, around MIT and Cambridge Summerville in Boston, and I'm here to share the perspective of graduate students.
[1:11:42] This zoning change will help limit market rate rent increases by mitigating housing scarcity while also allowing the construction of desperately needed affordable units.
[1:11:51] And data from two surveys, one conducted by the GSC and one conducted by my home department highlight the urgency of the housing crisis as an equity issue.
[1:12:02] Only 40% of graduate students in my department who identifies first-generation college students agreed that they were able to transition to MIT without severe financial burden compared to a much higher percentage 75% of non-first-generation students.
[1:12:18] The financial burden of relocation is primarily driven by high housing costs in the area.
[1:12:24] And our GSC survey similarly found that first-generation and low-income students were those most impacted by high housing costs.
[1:12:31] Multiple students even reported having to live in Airbnb's for the first few weeks in Cambridge because our low vacancy rate made it impossible for them to find a place to live before they needed to start their program.
[1:12:41] Our striking results motivated us to continue pressuring both local government and the MIT administration to reduce the cost of housing.
[1:12:50] Failure to address our housing crisis will not diminish the desirability of the excellent educational, professional, cultural and professional experiences Cambridge has to offer.
[1:12:59] But it will limit who can take advantage of these opportunities.
[1:13:01] If we want Cambridge to be a place that welcomes people of all backgrounds, we cannot allow housing
[1:13:07] scarcity to continue acting as a barrier to low income people who are here to pursue their dreams.
[1:13:15] Thank you, Holly.
[1:13:16] We will go to Lori Sheffield, followed by Kamila Elvis, Sydney Snow, then Kathy Hoffman.
[1:13:23] Lori, you have two minutes.
[1:13:24] Please go ahead.
[1:13:29] Okay.
[1:13:30] I'm unmuted.
[1:13:31] Hello, I'm a Cambridge part resident and I've lived in Cambridge for decades.
[1:13:37] I'm sure that all the speakers in favor of increased housing are both speaking from their
[1:13:45] hearts and absolutely correct in terms of the pressures that many people face in terms of housing
[1:13:52] cost. There are other speakers who have gone through the proposed amendments in more detail.
[1:13:58] I'd like to speak to the active use of the ground floor issue which was spelled out pretty carefully related to existing businesses on Cambridge Street.
[1:14:08] This is one of the few semi-entact shopping districts in Cambridge and includes businesses I regularly use.
[1:14:17] The hardware store, the craft store, the rug store, the paint store.
[1:14:22] This is one of the places in Cambridge where you can actually shop locally.
[1:14:27] As a property owner and a homeowner and someone who brought up children in the city, I want
[1:14:32] these types of shopping areas to be possible and I think that careful work on this proposal
[1:14:37] can make that more possible. So I would like to support the Nolan Amendment about the number
[1:14:43] of stories included and would like to particularly emphasize the parts of the proposal which
[1:14:48] address existing businesses, the size, the square footage of businesses on the ground floors and part
[1:14:56] of that is because of having observed development on other major quarters.
[1:15:00] Thank you. Our next speaker is Camilla Elvis. Camilla has not joined the Zoom. We're going to go to Sydney Snow, followed by Kathy Hoffman. Sydney, please go ahead. You have two minutes.
[1:15:15] Thank you all. Good evening. My name is Sydney Snow, a 43 fifth street, just off Cambridge. I'm here to discuss the proposition to amend the zoning map and zoning ordinances and item number three on the table.
[1:15:26] Well, I think added residential space would be beneficial to those who live in this corridor.
[1:15:30] There just not seem to be a guarantee of inclusionary housing projects or other types
[1:15:34] of affordable housing being mandated in the future with this zoning plan, which is why I would
[1:15:38] like to suggest that the council allows the amendment to expire and to add language in revisions
[1:15:43] to the amendment for guaranteed inclusionary housing and or other types of affordable housing
[1:15:47] in any future projects.
[1:15:49] My concern is that the inclusionary housing will be avoided in new developments if it is below the
[1:15:53] and unit in 10,000 square foot threshold for inclusionary housing mandates outlined in section 11.203 of the current zoning ordinance.
[1:16:01] And that we will continue to see expensive units come up even with the zoning changes if they go through.
[1:16:06] This would make an already expensive area even more and affordable pushing out long time residents in the working class.
[1:16:12] On a more personal note, I'm a teacher and I honestly already struggle to live in the area due to the cost of living, specifically the housing costs.
[1:16:19] And I think it would be really beneficial to working class residents as a whole, not just those who would qualify for the inclusionary housing.
[1:16:26] If there was a guarantee of that type of housing amid rising rent prices, I know it's been suggested by some that there is naturally occurring affordable housing.
[1:16:34] But in all honesty, I was looking for housing 68 months before I plan to move to Cambridge this past year.
[1:16:40] And the housing prices are astronomical, I think, across the board, especially considering the state of a lot of the older housing stock.
[1:16:47] Thank you all for your time. Again, I would urge a council to just put this on hold and
[1:16:51] like some other folks have said, please review it. I also agree with you know the other
[1:16:56] comments about kind of reviewing some other parts of the plan. It seems like some more specific
[1:17:02] verbiage would be helpful in a couple of different sections. So thank you all for your time.
[1:17:07] Thank you our next speaker is Kathy Hoffman followed by Barrel Lipton then Max Kaplan.
[1:17:12] Kathy, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[1:17:25] Can you hear me? We can. Please go ahead.
[1:17:29] Beautiful. Good snowy evening. I want to begin thanking the city workers out there,
[1:17:35] making it possible for us to move around and keep our lives sort of on track.
[1:17:41] With so much blowing up and dividing us around the country, it shows the cooperation and mutual care we really need.
[1:17:47] It's in that spirit that I'm adding my voice to those asking for the unimended Cambridge
[1:17:53] treat zoning to expire.
[1:17:55] So we can reorient, stop fighting each other, or putting time into a fraught proposal,
[1:18:01] which has the possibility of heights without benefits, or even with benefits, which might
[1:18:06] disappear, leaving us with tall, as of right heights led by developers.
[1:18:13] As we see, I also want to mention to the graduate student from MIT, I appreciate your remarks and that is part of why there has been an ongoing struggle to hold MIT responsible for housing its graduate students, not putting that burden on the city of Cambridge to build buildings for you.
[1:18:32] As we see the divides between the haves and have not dramatically played out around us, this council should take the time to find solutions to housing,
[1:18:40] as well as health care public safety transit, which benefit the good of the whole while
[1:18:46] catering those most left out. We don't have to vilify anyone to lift up those
[1:18:52] most in need in our city and choosing things like social housing, CLTs, or maximum
[1:18:58] affordability over market rate giveaways for developers.
[1:19:02] Finally, I just want to mention I'm in support of Landmarking the Democracy Center
[1:19:07] As someone who was in and out of that building with many hats on over the past 25 years,
[1:19:13] it was an extraordinary, extraordinary place of vibrancy on the whole breadth of what democracy
[1:19:22] can mean from feeding people to envisioning new ways of being serving high school students
[1:19:29] in the Cambridge and many others, creating this statute, I think my apologies, Kathy, please
[1:20:00] Barrel, two minutes, please go ahead.
[1:20:03] Thank you so much. Barrel looked in Oak Street. I've spoken with many Cambridge Street people of diverse backgrounds and clones and levels of comfort with public testimony.
[1:20:12] Our concerns about community engagement, planning and details, transparency, our beloved small businesses, environment, history, and vibrancy in the public realm, the love. I and we have expressed all that in good faith.
[1:20:25] While I've worked and volunteered for nonprofits, I've spent more than a quarter million dollars in rent alone in Cambridge and I've never owned a car.
[1:20:33] I'm still trying to make the numbers pencil for my own life.
[1:20:36] And I respect this place and it's people and those who share and want to share this home in the great cultural center that is Cambridge, a place worthy of quality thought.
[1:20:44] On that note, I want to share that last week, friends made me aware of an unfortunate blog post by a local commentator featuring images of the Webster Wins or Area regarding this petition in all of Cambridge Street.
[1:20:54] It stated, in part, City Council needs to decide, will it maintain the character of gas stations and tow lots?
[1:21:01] I've walked to these streets, including Webster literally thousands of times.
[1:21:05] Development there is a chamber bill issue, and it's wild to encounter such confusion about the character of Cambridge Street we've referenced,
[1:21:11] and suggests that we don't see both room for serious progress and the empty spaces and labs that already exist.
[1:21:17] This kind of low quality framing of important community issues is crap.
[1:21:21] And to it I say, miss me with that kind of bad faith BS.
[1:21:25] I did appreciate hearing interest tonight, and some of the same questions we've been asking,
[1:21:29] and I've truly appreciated the conversations and actual care some of you have shown to me in my neighborhood.
[1:21:34] I welcome more discussion with anyone interested in Cambridge Street's future as I'm optimistic that our values are not so different.
[1:21:41] While I want this particular split shot petition to expire, I know that it isn't the last word on what happens to Cambridge Street,
[1:21:47] and I'll be here for those next conversations.
[1:21:49] The bones here are good, and it should be truly thoughtful about the renovation.
[1:21:54] I urge you counselors as you move forward with this term and plans for Central Square and
[1:21:57] sewage and transit in our city. Please, show us what real consideration and deliberation and
[1:22:02] quality conversation looks like. Model the local leadership and good government governance
[1:22:07] our city deserves and our country needs. Thank you.
[1:22:17] All right, I could not mute there. Our next speaker is Max Kaplan, followed by Mary Ann Quinn,
[1:22:23] and then Amina Bubuakar.
[1:22:26] Max, you have two minutes.
[1:22:35] Max, if you can unmute yourself,
[1:22:37] you have two minutes.
[1:22:38] Please go ahead.
[1:22:39] Yep.
[1:22:40] Hi, Max Kaplan, 45 years of road.
[1:22:43] If you look at which cities across the country
[1:22:45] have managed to halt or reverse
[1:22:47] of control rent prices, they all have one thing in common.
[1:22:50] They built more units.
[1:22:52] I support the Cambridge Street Obsoning
[1:22:54] because we need the housing.
[1:22:55] Thank you.
[1:22:59] Thank you, our next speaker is Marianne Quinn followed by Amina Bubakar, the Nancy Ryan, Marianne, if you can unmute yourself please go ahead you have two minutes.
[1:23:14] Hi, it's Marianne Quinn. I live at 29 out of three and I would like to comment on the up zoning.
[1:23:20] So 29 Otis Street is part of the one-first complex that takes up the city block of Cambridge and Otis and first and second streets.
[1:23:29] Our building has more than 400 residents in a six-story complex of building situated around a courtyard.
[1:23:36] We understood that the empty parcel of land directly across Cambridge Street was zoned to become a six-story building with a seven-floor building utilities such as HVAC.
[1:23:46] We now understand that the City Council is considering upzoning this lot and allowing a developer to put up a 15-story building,
[1:23:54] more than double the original footprint.
[1:23:57] Communication about this potential change was not well disseminated, we only learned about it by chance.
[1:24:03] A 15-story building would dwarf our building, along with the triple deckers adjacent to this lot,
[1:24:09] and the glass factory apartment building across McGrath highway.
[1:24:12] and East Cambridge is a whole which is mostly two and three story buildings. It is not
[1:24:17] in keeping with the neighborhood. Residents of the neighborhood recently endured the demolition
[1:24:22] of the Sullivan courthouse in the building of Forty Thorndike, a process that went on for months
[1:24:27] and months. Forty Thorndike has only three occupied floors, the rest of the building at empty.
[1:24:34] We do not want another large noisy, disruptive lengthy construction project. The proposed
[1:25:00] That up for blocks during rush hour on Cambridge Street. Finally, a 15-story building will result in a permanent loss of day like to our apartments, as well as to the community roof deck and courtyard. Please vote against this proposal. Thank you.
[1:25:15] Thank you. Our next speaker is Amina Rubikar followed by Nancy Ryan, then Mark Truent. Amina, you have the floor. Please go ahead two minutes.
[1:25:26] I
[1:25:36] mean, I see you listed as different name possibly if you can unmute yourself. You have the floor.
[1:25:46] Okay, we're going to move on to Nancy Ryan followed by Mark Truett. Nancy, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:25:58] Hi, good evening and thanks for this discussion.
[1:26:03] I urge you to let this Cambridge Street up zoning petition expire.
[1:26:08] We do have a housing crisis in Cambridge, but the name of the crisis is affordability, and there is nothing built into this petition that guarantees any kinds of affordability.
[1:26:23] I just want to note that recently, leaders of the so-called Yimbee Abundance Housing Movement in Massachusetts and in Cambridge have been quoted as saying that essentially inclusionary zoning gets in the way of development.
[1:26:43] So it's kind of becoming clear that this is not a priority for the intense advocates of the height and density agenda.
[1:26:53] So let's take a breath, let this petition expire, and take a look at how Cambridge Street can, we can plan Cambridge Street for the future that is genuinely inclusive of low and moderate income earners in particular,
[1:27:11] But of a broad range of residents. Thanks so much. Thank you.
[1:27:18] We already heard from Jerry Puchillo. We're going to go to Mark Truett followed by Steven Gardner, then Susan Markowitz.
[1:27:27] Mark, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:27:38] Mark Truett? Yep. Please go ahead. Okay.
[1:27:43] Okay, hi, it's ironic that the long-time home of the democracy center was mentioned by
[1:27:50] a couple of my fellow can't to bridge in earlier this evening because the way that the
[1:27:55] up zoning along Cambridge Street has been enacted over the past year has been anything
[1:27:59] but democratic.
[1:28:00] It is a good example of how our government acts without first understanding the impact
[1:28:04] of major zoning chances and crafting regulations that will achieve goals without destroying
[1:28:10] the built environment.
[1:28:12] The our Cambridge Street study had been cited by counselors and other supporters of up
[1:28:16] zoning as a justification for it.
[1:28:18] For the record, the study stated that in the public, that stated that the public in general
[1:28:25] was okay with an increase in density, as long as the additional housing was affordable and
[1:28:32] sunlight, open space, trees, traffic, and parking were all counted for, so that the character
[1:28:37] of the neighborhood was respected and strengthened.
[1:28:39] The ordinances which have been passed and those proposed are not responsive to the study.
[1:28:46] Cambridge Shree is 65 feet wide. The study itself recognized that increasing building heights
[1:28:51] on the street beyond four stories would have a negative impact unless buildings were required
[1:28:57] to have step backs so that sunlight would reach people and trees on the street and the building's
[1:29:02] massing would be in scale and responsive to the context of the neighborhood.
[1:29:07] Redder, whose company famously fought oil field fires to bring them under control, said
[1:29:12] to a client.
[1:29:13] If you think it's expensive to hire professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.
[1:29:21] I respect the desire to increase density and housing, but the ordinances that have been
[1:29:27] worked on today are works of an amateur.
[1:29:31] We need to hold this press redo all of these ordinances.
[1:29:36] Thank you.
[1:29:39] Thank you.
[1:29:40] Our next speaker is Stephen Gardiner followed by Susan Markowitz, then Deborah Kovar.
[1:29:46] Stephen, you have two minutes.
[1:29:52] Stephen, if you can try to admit yourself, you have the floor.
[1:29:56] I'm Stephen Gardiner.
[1:29:58] I live at 29 out of street.
[1:30:00] The idea of triple-deckerers, storm fronts, and modest mid-rise properties. Thankfully, that compromise included
[1:30:08] an increase in affordable housing. Most recent developments like CBS, pharmacy, and buildings
[1:30:15] long first street have maintained that low-rise profile. With the proposed up zoning of Cambridge
[1:30:23] treated Parsons 7, the city of Cambridge may once again impose an out of scale tower
[1:30:29] or our community, albeit residential.
[1:30:33] At the entry point, the residential east Cambridge, if allowed to proceed, this tower will
[1:30:39] stand out as an unwelcoming sewer thump.
[1:30:44] This site should not be an extension of Cambridge crossing rather a welcoming addition to east
[1:30:49] a reflection of the residential and storefront community
[1:30:53] bullet war at its beginning.
[1:30:56] As one first condominium association owner,
[1:31:01] I could certainly urge the council to reduce the
[1:31:03] zoning height to force the seven because of its negative impact
[1:31:07] on our particular community from congestion at an albeit challenging
[1:31:11] intersection to a necessary blocking sunshine to our
[1:31:15] complex that the more compelling argument against this
[1:31:19] zoning is a negative impact. It's such a sore comb would have on our entire community. I
[1:31:26] close the proposed up zoning of parcel, seven, and herbs that council to allow the petition to
[1:31:32] expire. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker is Susan Markowitz followed by
[1:31:39] Deborah Kovar, then Sophia Sanchez. We have about 11 speakers left for those who are waiting.
[1:31:47] Susan, you have two minutes, please go ahead.
[1:31:54] Hi, thank you.
[1:31:55] Thank you to Patty Nolan and Symbol Sadiki for your recent amendment.
[1:32:00] This is a compromise and I really appreciate it.
[1:32:03] I still say they'll let the petition expire, because the overwhelming majority of people in the community do not know that this petition exists.
[1:32:12] This morning when I was struggling, I spoke to my next or neighbor in a neighbor across the street, both of whom I met for the first time.
[1:32:18] neither of them knew anything about the petition. One responded,
[1:32:22] that's horrible. How did you find out about this?
[1:32:24] The other one who moved in in September said,
[1:32:27] oh no, they're going my favorite shops down the street.
[1:32:30] When is this going to happen?
[1:32:32] I really don't understand why it's not important for residents to be notified about this
[1:32:37] petition. Most people do not go to or read the city council meetings.
[1:32:42] They have not been informed about the major changes that you're planning
[1:32:45] in contrast to the Cambridge Street study. We've suggested a two-month democratic community process
[1:32:52] to give people a chance to hear what and why you were proposing this precision.
[1:32:57] There would get a chance to be heard. The outstanding issues could that we could discuss
[1:33:02] could include the amount of inclusionary housing that will be generated because it's not known
[1:33:06] and it's likely small. The need for increased project review, labs that are currently as of
[1:33:13] increasing step-backs, increasing open space, increased street trees, increased protections
[1:33:19] for small, small, first floor businesses. You've said the petition as amended needs to be
[1:33:25] passed now in order to move on to central square. Really, is this how you're going to treat
[1:33:30] the residents in central square? What is the rush? If you think that this is what Cambridge
[1:33:35] Street needs engage us in the legitimate two-month community process, we'll ask some questions
[1:33:40] express what we like and you can do the same. Please do not short-change us. This will renew our trust
[1:33:47] and faith in you. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Deborah Kovar, followed by Sophia Sanchez,
[1:33:55] then Kirin Vaya. I really thank you. I don't.
[1:34:08] Deborah, if you can please unmute yourself, you have the floor.
[1:34:13] Can you hear me now?
[1:34:16] We can. Please go have a great.
[1:34:17] I'm Deborah Kovar and I'm an owner
[1:34:19] at one first condominium at 150 Cambridge Street.
[1:34:23] I'm here tonight to address policy number three
[1:34:26] and to ask the city council to oppose
[1:34:29] the up zoning proposal to a 15 story building
[1:34:33] along Cambridge Street.
[1:34:35] While I support responsible development
[1:35:00] We'll contribute to a heavily congested area. Cohesion with surrounding structures would be best served by a six to eight story structure, which also makes provisions for parking.
[1:35:14] This would also maintain and respect the well-vetted process that was previously undertaken for zoning to allow a six to eight story building.
[1:35:22] Please vote no to up zoning along the Cambridge corridor. No on policy number three. Thank you for your time
[1:35:31] Our next speaker is Sofia Sanchez
[1:35:34] then Karen via followed by Ann Cover. Sofia.
[1:35:41] I
[1:35:42] Don't see Sofia on the Zoom. We will go to Karen via Karen two minutes. Please go ahead
[1:35:49] Hi, I live in one first Cambridge, which overlooks this parking, the space, which was the
[1:35:55] erstwhile beach beach station, and I urge the city council members to oppose the
[1:36:01] up zoning for converting this previously approved six story building into a proposed 15 story
[1:36:07] building.
[1:36:08] Like the rest of them before me have mentioned the reduction in sunlight, which is going to force
[1:36:14] us to turn our lights on during the day, increasing our electricity bills, the parking, no
[1:36:18] requirement for parking increases the traffic, which is, which is almost beginning to be a nightmare
[1:36:24] already. This, no, there's already 40 thundry, which we see very scarcely occupied. So,
[1:36:32] is there really a requirement for more housing when we can't fill in what exists already? And this
[1:36:38] totally changes, the look and feel of Cambridge state where we've lived for almost 15 years now.
[1:36:43] That said, apart from the fact that the burden is going to fall on the rest of us who have been living here and serving this community and contributing to this community,
[1:36:51] it's also not going to increase, improve, provide a good quality of life for people living in this new building,
[1:36:57] with no parking, with congested areas, no grocery stores in, in walkable distance, which means everybody will have to have a car or some public transportation or ubers.
[1:37:06] It's going to convert this whole street and area into extremely unlivable surroundings.
[1:37:14] So in the name of affordable housing, is this what we're providing to the folks who would want to come and live in these buildings.
[1:37:21] So I respectfully urge you to please let this expire, rethink how this gels with the Cambridge Street community and not necessarily the Cambridge Crossing community,
[1:37:32] which is completely different while it's just across the street.
[1:37:35] And I do appreciate all the hard work that's being done in this, but respectfully urge to please reconsider this proposal.
[1:37:44] Thank you.
[1:37:45] Thank you.
[1:37:45] Our next speaker is Jamie Hayg.
[1:37:48] Jamie.
[1:37:49] We have two minutes.
[1:37:50] Please go ahead.
[1:37:59] Jamie.
[1:38:01] Sorry, Jamie, if you can try to unmute yourself again.
[1:38:04] Oh, sure.
[1:38:05] Yep.
[1:38:05] Go ahead.
[1:38:06] Thank you.
[1:38:07] My name is Jamie Hayg.
[1:38:09] and my wife and I live at 17 out of street in Cambridge at one first. And, like many of the other speakers have said, we oppose the proposed up zoning petition, especially as it pertains to the development of the parcel across the street from one first as either parcels six or seven.
[1:38:37] the former Leachmeer Station site to construct up to 15 stories.
[1:38:45] That is completely out of character with the character of the rest of the neighboring property.
[1:38:54] It will affect traffic and congestion in the area, and will not be designed or developed for affordable housing.
[1:39:06] A 15-story complex, as I understand, is this is being proposed as a benefit for a particular
[1:39:20] developer who is interested in developing high-end residential housing and just increasing
[1:39:28] profit, but it's going to affect the Cambridge community as a whole to have this high-density
[1:40:00] On another day. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Anne Coburn followed by John Gagliardi, then James Williamson, and you have the floor two minutes.
[1:40:12] Thank you. Hi, my name is Anne Coburn. I live at 117A. Oh, it's a strange language. Tonight, I am speaking to urge that the city council pass.
[1:40:22] able motion number three to allow this Cambridge Street rezoning petition to move forward.
[1:40:28] I usually urge elected officials to do things because it's the right thing to do for people,
[1:40:33] because everybody should be able to afford a place to live because there's enough housing for folks, et cetera.
[1:40:40] But tonight, well, this is the right thing to do.
[1:40:42] I'm also going to mention that I believe that passing this motion is a necessary first step to
[1:40:47] first in diversifying the size and number of businesses in Cambridge by revisiting the ground
[1:40:54] slow commercial requirements in the future.
[1:40:57] Or at least the last few decades, Cambridge has relied on a restrictive economic
[1:41:02] monoculture of biotech and academics.
[1:41:05] The cities available commercial and housing spaces speak to that economic framework.
[1:41:10] Well-funded venture capital back businesses or universities with massive endowments versus
[1:41:16] the ability to create the capacity for small businesses to grow more gradually and more sustainably.
[1:41:25] But now, the real-life concrete and long-term effects of the Trump administration's assault on those kinds of industries
[1:41:32] deeply affects the city of Cambridge's current property tax revenue sources.
[1:41:38] I believe that by passing this motion, the City of Cambridge may be positioned to cultivate
[1:41:43] more small to medium-sized industries and more space to welcome new ideas, new businesses
[1:41:49] and new residents, residents who can actually afford to live here, because I think that this
[1:41:54] city needs that kind of energy-hope and movement. Thank you so much for your time.
[1:41:59] Thank you, our next speaker is John Gagliardi, followed by James Williamson, then Ed Henry.
[1:42:05] John, you have the floor you have two minutes. Please go ahead
[1:42:17] on your unmuted.
[1:42:25] We're not getting any sound from John. We're going to move on to James Williamson followed by Ed Henley. Then Jose Estrella James, you have the floor you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:42:39] Can you hear me?
[1:42:41] We can.
[1:42:43] That's probably a study.
[1:42:45] But anyway, thank you.
[1:42:49] I want to talk a first about the Cambridge Street
[1:42:52] Upsoning proposal.
[1:42:55] I learned for the first time tonight,
[1:42:57] here listen to some people on Otis Street
[1:43:00] in the Leachmere about this
[1:43:04] idea of the proposal for a major
[1:43:08] a development in excess of what they, their previous understanding had been.
[1:43:15] I think what we need to know among other things before anything gets passed is, when developers
[1:43:22] go in and have private meetings with city staff, are we entitled to know what the details
[1:43:30] are of those conversations?
[1:43:31] I'm not necessarily against city staff talking to developers, but I think we who live here
[1:43:37] have a right to know what transpires in those conversations. Our city staff making deals
[1:43:44] privately to accommodate developers and we're not told about it. And now we have to hear
[1:43:50] about it as city council meeting. I do think there are a lot of problems with this Cambridge
[1:43:56] Street proposal. It seems like a real mess. The more I listen to other speakers. By the way,
[1:44:02] MIT, and there was a time when the graduate student council there demanded that MIT
[1:44:08] fouls all of their graduate students on land they already own in attractive housing
[1:44:15] at affordable prices. But anyway, I want to say a word about the stigma landmark petition.
[1:44:22] I think it's flawed, and I don't think you should pass it. It did remind me of the addition,
[1:44:29] the East addition to the White House that was demolished recently, to the horror of many people,
[1:44:36] and now you're going to allow an addition that makes that building, gives it the integrity
[1:44:41] that it currently has, and it seems like a sellout, so I hope you don't pass it.
[1:44:47] Thank you, our next speaker is Ed Henley followed by Jose Estrella. Ed, you have two minutes,
[1:44:56] Please go ahead.
[1:45:00] Local homes for new housing in for everyday and especially lower income residents to live in and live in over the course of a lifetime, especially if they're raising a family.
[1:45:12] Community in Cambridge is everything. It is that community of people that wants affordable housing, but wants it including the ability to drive, park and shop, attain medical services and medical goods, those kinds of things locally.
[1:45:28] locally is where we spend the majority of our incomes, whether that's from our retirement
[1:45:34] income from work or from renting apartments that some people have worked for a lifetime
[1:45:43] to own enter rent, of people to own their own homes.
[1:45:49] I can personally name small family owned businesses and they probably own the actual building
[1:45:55] as well as opposed to renting on Cambridge Street, as well as Inman Square, which regularly
[1:46:02] makes the, which I regularly make the rounds of when I'm shopping. Typically, it'll do a
[1:46:08] medical appointment and then stop in a couple places on Cambridge Street, a couple places in
[1:46:14] Inman Square. Please do not change Cambridge in such that a way that large mega-mogles own
[1:46:22] large development, property, and constantly test tenets ability to pay without
[1:46:30] religious rent increases in whatever added cost they can add to that tenets cost of
[1:46:40] living there. This creates such instability for families trying to match, trying
[1:46:46] to maintain consistency, especially with regards to living situations,
[1:46:54] in their children's schooling as well as ability to get around the community. Please don't
[1:47:00] put these community features at risk. I guess please do the right thing the right way for
[1:47:08] the right reason. Thank you very much. Thank you. We are going to skip Jose as he is not joined.
[1:47:15] We will go to Kathleen Higgins followed by Heather Hoffman. Kathleen,
[1:47:22] you have two minutes. Please
[1:47:23] Go ahead.
[1:47:26] Hi, my name is Kathy and I live at 345 North Extreme.
[1:47:30] A few houses in from Cambridge Street and in from Square.
[1:47:33] I strongly support acting favorably on the Cambridge Street petition to change the
[1:47:37] going to allow for more homes.
[1:47:39] I have also lived for me.
[1:47:40] I also live for many years at Inmond Square apartments and can only hope that more buildings
[1:47:45] like this can be built with this zoning and thus add to the vibrancy of Cambridge Street.
[1:47:50] I experienced the wonderful caring people who lived in immense correspondence who created a community of support despite yes challenges.
[1:47:58] If HRI working with the residents had not preserved the approximately 100 apartments as affordable, many people who found a home there would have had to leave Cambridge.
[1:48:08] We need a wide range of housing tools and more of all types of housing build.
[1:48:13] Of course, we should do all we can to increase deeply affordable housing and the possibility of social housing being developed and Cambridge is an exciting new type.
[1:48:22] But we also need to provide options for those in the affordable ranges that qualify for 100% affordable housing that take just to start nature.
[1:48:30] I build as well as those who don't qualify to these or in claims in our units, but who may be paying exorbitant rents, 50% of their income are in rent.
[1:48:39] As we, as others have said, disowning for more housing represents another step forward by removing the barriers to allowing all types of housing in all neighborhoods.
[1:48:50] It is part of undoing a history, a sad history of exclusionary and racist zoning.
[1:48:56] If a compromise was entertaining the ability to build denser and taller near such areas
[1:49:02] as Webster, then that should be, that should be rezoned for housing, then I would support
[1:49:08] that rather than see the petition die. We don't need more process. Thank you.
[1:49:13] Thank you, our next speaker is Heather Hoffman. Heather, you have two minutes. Please go ahead.
[1:49:20] Hello, Heather Hoffman, 213 Hurley Street, like to start off with the court cases once again and I would just love to hear how the inclusionary zoning case is doing and whether you actually got the answer in today along with the three new lawyers.
[1:50:00] We're worth anything. And did anything to make it so we could get around better. Look at how you set up construction and what you want is construction everywhere all the time.
[1:50:15] And pedastrians just get shunted from one side of the street to the other if they're lucky.
[1:50:20] With respect to the Cambridge Street zoning,
[1:50:25] I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there
[1:50:28] is, as someone said before me, absolutely nothing in this zoning to expect that you will
[1:50:35] build anything affordable. This is simply a giveaway to developers, and I understand that
[1:50:42] that is the way Cambridge does things, take a look at what's being built now, such as it is.
[1:50:51] people are regularly avoiding providing a single inclusionary apartment.
[1:51:00] They will build bigger, they'll make more money, and it will be nothing affordable to it.
[1:51:07] I will also note as was noted before me that there doesn't seem to be a zoning map or a description anywhere in the packet.
[1:51:20] And I'm just wondering if you guys are two overworked at CDD to get your act together or what?
[1:51:30] Because I have not seen such screw up in the past just on a regular basis.
[1:51:41] So please let it left.
[1:51:43] Thank you.
[1:51:46] Madam Mayor, that is all that we're signed up to speak.
[1:51:51] Thank you Naomi for leading us to public comment
[1:52:00] and that concludes public comment on a motion by
[1:52:09] Councillor Simmons to close public comment.
[1:52:13] We'll do a roll call.
[1:52:14] Councillor Azubi.
[1:52:16] Yes.
[1:52:16] Yes.
[1:52:16] Vice-merezine.
[1:52:18] Yes.
[1:52:18] Yes.
[1:52:19] Councillor Flaherty.
[1:52:20] Yes.
[1:52:21] Yes.
[1:52:21] Councillor McGovern.
[1:52:24] Yes.
[1:52:24] Councilor Nolan? Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes.
[1:52:29] Councilor Sabrina Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Councilor Zucy?
[1:52:37] Yes. Yes.
[1:52:38] Mayor Sadiki? Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[1:52:43] Public comment is now closed. There's no submission of their record.
[1:52:48] There are no reconsiderations. So we'll move on to city managers agenda.
[1:52:54] I had hold counselors on items that they'd like to pull.
[1:53:00] So what I'm going to do to make it as easy as possible is I'm going to
[1:53:04] pull the ones that my colleagues had inquired about and then we'll do a
[1:53:12] motion on the balance and when I and I'll sign particular counselors to the
[1:53:19] ones that they had pulled and when we get to each item I'll ask for you to
[1:53:24] raise your hands when after the counselor is spoken, you have additional questions.
[1:53:32] So we'll pull number one, and then number three was pulled by counselor Juicy. And
[1:53:40] number four was also pulled by counselor Juicy. We have number five that was pulled by
[1:53:46] Councillor Nolan. We have number seven. That was pulled by Councillor Simmons. And then we have
[1:53:54] City Manager agenda item number 10. That was pulled by Councillor Zousie. And then finally we have
[1:54:03] City Manager agenda item number 11 that was pulled by Councillor Nolan. After we just have
[1:54:10] exposed to the city matters of agenda. We do have a late city matters of agenda and I'll come
[1:54:17] to the motion at that time, along with some of the other motions, we'll have to do. So for the record,
[1:54:22] we've pulled number one, number three, number four, number five, number seven, number 10, and 11.
[1:54:31] Are there any in addition to this? My colleagues would like to pull.
[1:54:37] Hearing none, we'll go ahead
[1:54:39] into a roll call on city manager agenda.
[1:54:42] I have number two, six, eight, nine, please.
[1:54:48] Councilor L. Zubi.
[1:54:50] Yes.
[1:54:50] Yes.
[1:54:51] Vice-Mayor Azine.
[1:54:52] Yes.
[1:54:53] Council of laFlarity.
[1:54:54] Yes.
[1:54:55] Yes.
[1:54:55] Council of McEvern.
[1:54:57] Yes.
[1:54:58] Yes.
[1:54:58] Councilor Nolan.
[1:54:59] Yes.
[1:55:00] We'll go to city manager agenda item number one, which is a communication transmitted from
[1:55:05] Anne Wong City Manager relative to a federal updating, including an update on relevant court cases.
[1:55:11] City Manager, you have before.
[1:55:16] I can't hear you. We can't hear you.
[1:55:24] It's just not me, right? People can't hear city manager.
[1:55:27] Is that better? Great. Great.
[1:55:29] Great.
[1:55:30] Okay. Good for in business.
[1:55:33] Thank you, Mayor Sediki. I want to provide an update on all that's been happening.
[1:55:37] on ice enforcement across the country and how we are both responding and preparing
[1:55:42] in our own community. We have held cross-pensive departmental meetings to discuss
[1:55:49] immigration surges that we are seeing particularly in Minnesota and Maine and to
[1:55:53] review preparations for potential surge in the Greater Boston area. We've also
[1:55:57] begun meeting across the 17 Metro Mayor's communities in Greater Boston on
[1:56:01] sharing practices and coordinate responses across the region. Within Cambridge we've
[1:56:07] take in a number of city actions over the last year, including holding
[1:56:11] know your rights trainings in partnership with Mira and the State Office for
[1:56:14] refugees and immigrants, discretion of red cards and multiple languages to help
[1:56:18] people assert their constitutional rights and difficult situations, providing
[1:56:23] education and information on family preparedness, continuing to talk closely and
[1:56:27] partner where we can with local organizations, like Luce, B. John, Dinovo, and
[1:56:32] Greater Boston Legal Services. We've provided funding for Dinovo to provide
[1:56:36] legal assistance to low-income families and hosted a monthly legal clinic, and thank you as
[1:56:41] well to the City Council for the work to strengthen our welcoming community's ordinance,
[1:56:45] which includes specific reporting requirements for ICE actions in the City at regular intervals.
[1:56:51] We've also transitioned mixed out as families from federal to municipal housing vouchers to avoid
[1:56:56] the impact of changing HUD policies and potential data sharing with ICE. We provided training
[1:57:01] and protocols to frontline city staff on what to do of ICE shows up,
[1:57:06] demarcating public versus private spaces in city buildings and establishing a hotline
[1:57:10] for city staff to reach out to the law department or in business iris to review any potential
[1:57:16] administrative or judicial warrants that are being presented by ICE agents and finally
[1:57:20] we've taken significant legal action where we can. Related to immigration and ICE, the city
[1:57:25] is a plaintiff in two cases and filed nine Amicus briefs and litigations related to immigration
[1:57:30] enforcement and actions. So this is a growing list. I'm really appreciative for counselors and people
[1:57:37] in our community who continue to bring us great ideas. And in particular, thank you to Karolina
[1:57:42] Almante and the work that the Commission and Immigrant Rights and Citizenship has been doing in
[1:57:46] this space. Please continue to be in contact with Karolina and the Commission. Give us those ideas
[1:57:53] we're excited to assess new things that we can be doing and how we can support our community in this time.
[1:57:58] I know many of us over this weekend have been really horrified by the tragic second killing
[1:58:05] of a U.S. citizen in Minneapolis, Alex Pretty, who contrary to federal statements seems
[1:58:10] from video footage to have clearly been restrained by multiple agents when he was shot and
[1:58:15] killed.
[1:58:16] I know that many of us have been so deeply disturbed and as co-chairs of Metromares,
[1:58:21] Mayor Briata Lungel Kern of Medford and I released a statement to crying the ice occupation
[1:58:26] that we are seeing in Minnesota and Maine, we note that an occupying force does not belong
[1:58:32] in our communities or anywhere in the United States or America, and that these unconstitutional
[1:58:36] and unnecessary actions are making us less safe. The city of Cambridge also has filed an
[1:58:42] Amicus brief in the Minnesota verse known litigation that held a hearing earlier today,
[1:58:47] which requested an injunction on the isers that has caused so much harm in Minneapolis.
[1:58:52] this.
[1:58:53] The judge did not rule today from the bench, but promised that, quote, if I had a burner
[1:58:58] in front of the front burner, this would be on it, and that a decision would come
[1:59:02] quickly.
[1:59:04] Well, the judge was critical of the federal government's intent for the surge, as well
[1:59:07] as the long list of troubling actions.
[1:59:09] He also appeared skeptical of issuing a sweeping order for ICE to leave the state, rather
[1:59:15] than more narrow solutions targeting specific wrongs.
[1:59:19] What I think is actually very unprecedented in this case is that it's being built on the coercive nature of the ice surge,
[2:00:00] Common Constitutional use a federal power to coerced state action. In this line of argument, the court is being asked not to focus on a, quote, line by line, person by person analysis, or oversight of DHS operations, how many agents are too many, what the right practice should be, but rather that the act itself is illegitimate by its intent.
[2:00:20] We'll keep the city council updated, but this line of argument feels relevant because it's
[2:00:25] a similar pattern that we're litigating in other cases where the federal government is seeking
[2:00:29] to, for instance, withhold funds to coerce cities toward policy changes that are irrelevant
[2:00:35] to the program goals of that funding.
[2:00:40] So I think there's still ultimately a lot to be understood in terms of where that court ruling
[2:00:45] will land and even as we speak, I think decisions are being made but just know that we are
[2:00:51] certainly wanting to continue to be in close conversation with this city council with
[2:00:55] our community about how we're preparing actions that we can take and following and supporting
[2:01:00] communities around the country that are struggling with with what the federal government is doing.
[2:01:07] I also want to touch on the potential for a federal government shutdown after the upcoming
[2:01:12] deadline, which is the end of day this Friday, January 30th. We've been watching that deadline
[2:01:17] since the government reopened in the fall. At this point, it appears clear that Democrats in the
[2:01:23] Senate are unlikely to vote for funding packages that include more budget for the Department of
[2:01:28] Homeland Security and ICE without some reform, which may threaten the passage of these bills before
[2:01:33] the deadline. I think it's hard to know exactly how the next four days will unfold and there isn't
[2:01:39] a lot of time for them to figure out how to get all of these bills passed.
[2:01:45] The remaining agencies that need to be funded include the departments of defense, labor,
[2:01:50] health and human services, education, transportation, and housing and urban development.
[2:01:55] This represents about, I believe, 75% of the government's annual spending.
[2:02:00] And I think I would say as we experienced during the last recent shutdown, it will take
[2:02:04] time to better understand even after the government shuts down when appropriations run out and
[2:02:11] where there may be an impact that filters to states and cities. So we'll keep watching
[2:02:15] developments and we can provide a fuller update with more information in two weeks when we meet
[2:02:20] on Monday, February 9th, but just know that we're definitely in touch to try and figure out how
[2:02:26] this might affect our community and ultimately the programs that we're running.
[2:02:31] A final update just in terms of things that are happening that the council and the community
[2:02:36] may be thinking about in the next couple of weeks.
[2:02:40] A number of people in our community are very concerned over the expiration of temporary
[2:02:44] protected status for Haitians.
[2:02:47] That expires next Tuesday, February 3rd.
[2:02:50] There is a court decision that is scheduled to be made the day before next Monday, February
[2:02:55] 2nd, and it may be possible that an injunction or an extension may be issued.
[2:02:59] Certainly, the judge during a prior hearing was skeptical that the federal government had
[2:03:03] sufficiently reviewed whether conditions in the ground and Haiti had improved.
[2:03:08] Apparently, the only evidence of an actual review being conducted was a one sentence email
[2:03:13] sent about an hour after an inquiry was made to the State Department, but we will find out
[2:03:19] more in the coming week. I really wish there was more certainty that we could provide on what may
[2:03:24] happen. It is generally the case that even without temporary protected status, people who are
[2:03:32] in some pending asylum case would have legal protection. But given what we're seeing around the
[2:03:37] country, it's also clear that ICE is picking people up, detaining folks and putting people
[2:03:42] into deportation proceedings beyond, I think, what we have understood to be legal or policy within
[2:03:52] within DHS. And so I think this is sort of a case where I would really continue to encourage
[2:03:58] folks who are in these complicated statuses to be in touch with an immigration lawyer. We are
[2:04:06] trying to provide resources so that anybody can get in touch with an immigration lawyer and have their
[2:04:11] case worked on. But this is a tough time and really my heart is with everybody that's in these
[2:04:18] situations. So I think those are the major updates, things that we have been tracking and watching,
[2:04:24] and that will unfold over the next two weeks and very open to questions or comments from the
[2:04:31] council. So thank you all.
[2:04:37] Yes, thank you City Manager and you know, as has been mentioned,
[2:04:42] these are really challenging times and sometimes it feels like we have more questions than answers
[2:04:48] and as much information we can provide the community the better. I know my colleagues,
[2:04:54] and I have all thought about and asked about how we can even strengthen.
[2:05:00] So, I will ask that you raise your hand and I will then call on you in turn. And the raise hand feature is at the end. In the bottom of the screen.
[2:05:13] I'll go to Councillor Malzubi.
[2:05:18] Yeah, hey. Just want to say thank you for addressing the ways that our city is trying to be active about protecting our residents.
[2:05:24] It'd be great to get a list of the resources and opportunities that you noted here.
[2:05:30] And I also just want to also acknowledge the pain that you noted with the recent killings by ICE.
[2:05:36] I will personally be continuing to work on an assessment of our welcoming city ordinance,
[2:05:41] some are to what Mayor Sadiki noted, to ensure that our federal administration knows that when they are blurring the lines on who is what,
[2:05:48] that we will be moving to ensure that we are as explicit as possible in non-cooperation.
[2:05:54] I'll yield no questions there.
[2:05:58] Councillor Fairety.
[2:06:01] Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor. I just note that the 9th Circuit is a problematic circuit and we just had a big win there.
[2:06:09] One of the Amicus briefs that the city of Cambridge filed so congratulations to that. I've got a thought on our response to unlawful detention for a residence of city of Cambridge and maybe.
[2:06:24] you know, the city solicitor and and the city manager is interested in establishing a
[2:06:32] a volunteer network of lawyers, maybe 30 or 40 or 50 lawyers in the city of Cambridge,
[2:06:38] everybody could take a day and be the only call lawyer if somebody is detained if there's
[2:06:44] a surge in Cambridge, then we have a person who's identified for that day to go and file a
[2:06:51] maybe as corpus petition in the federal court.
[2:06:53] So the body's not removed because we're seeing this everywhere.
[2:06:58] Just a thought and we can talk about it, but I can graduate the city on its efforts.
[2:07:03] And let's keep it up.
[2:07:05] Thank you so much.
[2:07:08] I have councilor Nolan.
[2:07:13] Thank you Mayor and thank you city manager and thank you my colleagues.
[2:07:18] I do have a question on it.
[2:07:20] It's a sensitive area to know how many of our residents are in temporary protected status,
[2:07:27] but as the city manager referenced, one of the most, I think horrifying things that has
[2:07:34] been happening is that this particular federal administration is literally taking people even at
[2:07:40] the very point of when they are about to get their citizenship. They are not only ignoring the fact that
[2:07:48] many folks are here legally seeking asylum, but even when they've gone through the entire process
[2:07:55] followed every single rule and are about to finalize it. They have had no qualms about
[2:08:03] picking up people and detaining them unlawfully. Do we have standing if it is and I realize this is a
[2:08:10] question I'm throwing out? Would we have standing as a city if a resident is illegally detained to
[2:08:17] and sue the federal government back.
[2:08:19] Is that one of the tools in our toolkit
[2:08:22] that we will be able to use?
[2:08:24] I mean, one of the things that since they have no
[2:08:27] coins at all about breaking the law,
[2:08:28] the question is, can we, as a city, actually,
[2:08:31] have standing them just curious?
[2:08:34] And if we don't know then, I'll just,
[2:08:36] I'll just, and I think the other related question
[2:08:38] is, do we have a sense of how many families,
[2:08:41] as Councilor Zumi said, getting information
[2:08:43] out to the community to make sure all the families know
[2:08:47] what their options are and as Councillor Flaherty said, if we could make sure that any residents have access to
[2:08:54] perhaps in Pribono lawyers to help. Do we have any sense of how many residents this TPS affects?
[2:09:01] I have solicitor, Mayor.
[2:09:05] Thank you and through you, Madam Mayor. Just to the question on whether the city would have standing.
[2:09:12] Unfortunately, I don't think the city would have standing in that instance where there's an individual who's unlawfully detained.
[2:09:22] But I hear the points that several of you raised on looking at volunteer attorney services.
[2:10:00] Once a month I believe answering questions and then also connecting clinic participants with ongoing legal support, but I think we will be continuing to look at ways we can partner with our legal service providers and partner with volunteer attorneys and see if there's any other programs that the city can be part of to help get the necessary legal services out to the immigrants.
[2:10:33] And then Councilor Nill and you're taking question on the number.
[2:10:36] Right.
[2:10:36] Can we have any sense of that?
[2:10:39] I'm sure that maybe a city manager, maybe we can look into that.
[2:10:45] Yeah, we can look into it.
[2:10:47] Yeah.
[2:10:49] And then I actually think I just remind all of us that as we move forward, our welcoming ordinance is quite strong.
[2:10:57] You know, we can always look at it to see if we can improve it.
[2:11:01] The other thing we need to remember is that we need to insist on our rights if there are
[2:11:05] laws broken in our city to make sure we will be the ones to ensure that they are taking
[2:11:15] care of, you know, we know in many, in theapolis there's been a concerted effort to not even
[2:11:21] allow local law enforcement to be involved and it's something we should probably proactively
[2:11:26] think about how do we ensure that if if if I assault someone on the street our law enforcement
[2:11:34] officers right fully so will be in charge of adjudicating that and looking at it and if
[2:11:41] an isopist or assault someone which we have seen happen time and time again across the country
[2:11:46] we need to make sure that we can hold them accountable we will not interfere with the federal
[2:11:51] immigration work, however, when our own laws are broken, I think we need to proactively think about
[2:11:57] how do we ensure that our law enforcement can enforce law and order when the laws are being broken by
[2:12:06] federal officials. So I'm not sure that's an answerable question, but I do want to raise it now because we have
[2:12:12] certainly seen it and clearly it will come up at some point here because they will be after us given
[2:12:16] particularly our status as a as a city that stands strong.
[2:12:25] We're going to concentrate on that matter through you, Mr. Manager, can you just remind
[2:12:34] remind us that reports that we get from the police department on
[2:12:39] Is activity in the city. Those are what every three months.
[2:12:43] Oh, I'll have to do we get those.
[2:12:45] I thought it might have been every it's either every three months every quarter or every six months.
[2:12:50] check and I think we had one fairly recently in the fall.
[2:12:56] I would just maybe recommend, especially if we're looking at there's going to be a potential
[2:13:00] surge that maybe we get those reports more frequently.
[2:13:03] I think people, as much as we communicate with folks in the community about what is actually
[2:13:09] happening to the best of our knowledge, I think the better, I see on social media a lot
[2:13:15] about people saying, you know, I just was spotted here, I just was spotted there, a lot
[2:13:20] times those turn out not to be accurate. But again, everyone is so anxious and so on edge
[2:13:28] that the more information we can provide and then going, you know, going for months or longer to
[2:13:35] to give people information is probably too long given the way things are going and potentially
[2:13:39] going to go. So if we can do that maybe more often, I think that would be helpful.
[2:13:46] Yeah, that's all I have, Madam Mayor, I will.
[2:13:48] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[2:13:49] Through you, Mayor Sediki.
[2:13:51] I think we can definitely, we can maybe be in touch
[2:13:54] in terms of what is, what is better.
[2:13:57] I mean, I think doing it monthly would be fine.
[2:13:59] We currently have it quarterly.
[2:14:01] There has not been a significant amount of ice
[2:14:05] to tensions within the city of Cambridge,
[2:14:09] but certainly I think our understanding is there's been more
[2:14:11] activity in many of our surrounding communities
[2:14:14] and of course we are very much watching for if there would be any indication that there's
[2:14:20] going to be some sort of a surge or an uptick. So I appreciate that thought.
[2:14:25] Councilor McGovern. Other questions comments from the City Council on this?
[2:14:35] Seeing
[2:14:35] then we'll be in touch with the City Manager on other items. So on our motion by Councillor
[2:14:45] Simmons to place city manager gender number one on file. We'll do a roll call.
[2:14:51] Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azim. Yes. Yes. Council of Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Council of McGuvern.
[2:15:00] Number 1 is placed on file. We'll move on to city manager agenda item number 3. This has
[2:15:05] transmitted communication from Ian Wong City manager. Relative for the appropriation of $100,000 received
[2:15:12] from the Massachusetts School Building Authority to the public investment fund school, exterior
[2:15:17] ordinary expenditures account to fund the feasibility study and schematic design costs for the
[2:15:24] roof replacement project at the Cambridge Sports School,
[2:15:27] located at 89 Elm Street.
[2:15:29] Counselors, do you see you have the four?
[2:15:31] Thank you, Mayor Sedicki.
[2:15:35] I think it's great.
[2:15:36] We got this grant.
[2:15:37] I just wondered why a feasibility study,
[2:15:42] or whether a feasibility study and a design
[2:15:45] is needed for roof replacement, having,
[2:15:48] I know a school is more complicated than a house,
[2:15:51] But wouldn't a good roof or be able to come up with a plan and not need a hundred thousand dollars for feasibility study in a formal design.
[2:16:04] So that's a question through you, Mayor Sediki, for the city manager.
[2:16:10] So we have a bunch of school staff here, so we'll go to meet that.
[2:16:17] Sure, thank you, Mayor.
[2:16:19] Hi, my name is Gidad Konjukam, director of facilities for Cambridge Public Schools. I'm not sure if you can see me, but you can hear me, right?
[2:16:29] Yeah.
[2:16:30] Okay, excellent.
[2:16:31] So I just want to explain, you know, Massachusetts School Building of Authority process.
[2:16:38] So in order to get a program for accelerated repair, which is for replacement of roofs,
[2:16:54] boilers and windows, we need to submit the statement of interest last year around this time.
[2:17:00] After that, we get invited if we are selected based on the criteria that they have,
[2:17:06] which is usually the age and the condition of the roof or the boiler or the window.
[2:17:12] You get invited to do a feasibility study or a schematic design to see if we qualify
[2:17:21] for being accepted into their program.
[2:17:25] We finance the entire cost of the project and once the project is completed, we are
[2:17:31] burst, certain rate, which is roughly between 30 and 40% of cost of the project.
[2:17:39] These are MSB requirements. They're required us to do feasibility study. They also, if
[2:17:47] we are selected to go forward with the process, they will assign us a designer and the
[2:17:59] process, those are their rules. We've completed several projects, you know, with them in a past,
[2:18:08] and it is definitely, you know, something, if we were doing it on our own, which we had
[2:18:14] right now, we were in the midst of replacing a roof at a long-tailed Broadway, we would hire an architect
[2:18:21] ourselves. This is required, these roofs are a little more complex. There's a lot to go into,
[2:18:28] There's a lot of curves, a lot of things up on the roof is not just kind of like a flat
[2:18:34] roof that can easily be done, so there's definitely some design that goes into it.
[2:18:41] And we also need a design to go out to bed to the competitive buildings so that roof and
[2:18:49] contractor know what they're building on, what the condition of substructure is and all
[2:18:56] that so they can make up meaningful bid on the project. Thank you.
[2:19:03] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Again, through you, Mayor Sadiki. That's really
[2:19:08] helpful, helpful, Mr. Conject. And so we're not guaranteed of the funding from the state
[2:19:16] or partial funding for the repair of the roof, but it sounds like it's likely if we follow
[2:19:22] this procedure is that right? Yes, that is correct. Yeah. Anyway, sounds great and I thank you very
[2:19:30] much for making this happen. Thank you. Do my colleagues have any other questions on this?
[2:19:39] Thank you to the school staff who joined. Hearing none, we'll go ahead and do on a motion by
[2:19:47] Councillor Zuzzi, a roll call on the appropriation and placing
[2:19:51] city manager agenda item number three on file.
[2:19:55] Councillor Luzzi.
[2:19:56] Yes.
[2:19:57] Yes.
[2:19:57] Vice-mayorazine.
[2:19:59] Yes.
[2:20:00] The council of plurality. Yes. Yes. Council of McGuvern. Yes. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes.
[2:20:07] Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[2:20:21] We have placed the item on file, the money has been appropriated, will move on to City Manager
[2:20:29] agenda item number four.
[2:20:31] This is transmitting a communication from Ian Wong City Manager relative to the appointment
[2:20:36] of the following person's as public weirers for the calendar year 206 to operate scales
[2:20:41] at 500 fronts street, Cambridge Massachusetts, 0.142, Councilor Suzy, you have a four.
[2:20:47] Thank you so much, Mayor Siddiqui. I just wanted to hear more about this because it sounded very
[2:20:53] mysterious to me. How long is the term? What is the function of the public wayers? I've never
[2:21:00] heard of a public wayer. What are their qualifications? Are they paid? And I was looking at
[2:21:07] 500 front street. It looks like it's very close to MIT. Is it right beside MIT? I've never
[2:21:13] noted a scale there. So I'm just eager to learn more about this through you Mayor Siddiqui.
[2:21:18] I guess to Deputy City Manager, Kathy Watkins.
[2:21:25] Hi, through you, Madam Mayor. I think we are having some technical difficulties. So ISD is trying to
[2:21:32] log on who would be the best people to answer these questions. And so I genuinely apologize.
[2:21:39] So I know Peter was trying to apologize, trying to log on.
[2:21:44] We may have to get back to you on some of these questions.
[2:21:46] So thank you, Anthony.
[2:21:48] Yes.
[2:21:49] Sorry about that.
[2:21:51] Oh, perfect.
[2:21:51] Thank you, Anthony.
[2:21:52] I'm like, try to do it.
[2:21:54] Thank you.
[2:21:54] Anthony is here.
[2:21:55] We're a good ambulance.
[2:21:57] Sure.
[2:21:57] I thank you, Councilor.
[2:21:58] For that question.
[2:21:59] Through you, Madam Mass.
[2:22:00] Publicways.
[2:22:01] In Massachusetts, cities and towns.
[2:22:04] Swear and Publicways.
[2:22:06] For businesses to ensure accuracy and fairness.
[2:22:08] with their state consumer protection laws of sale of goods and weights and measures.
[2:22:14] This practice is mandated by Mass General Law, Chapter 41, Section 85, which requires
[2:22:20] mass and city councils to appoint wares upon request to verify accuracy of commodities, particularly
[2:22:29] in heavy materials like stone and sand.
[2:22:32] When it is, as Boston Senator Gravel had, sell such large volumes of goods, these public
[2:22:40] ways sworn in to certify that the goods that they sell weigh to according to law.
[2:22:49] They do go through quarterly third-party inspection, and we do join them once a year on
[2:22:58] third party, especially in Sean, is our inspector who does that, is online also.
[2:23:06] I think one of your questions was, do they get paid? They get paid by Boston Sending Gravel,
[2:23:13] not by us, and it's just to safeguard against public fraud and carelessness
[2:23:22] involving weights and measures.
[2:23:25] So, is there anything?
[2:23:26] Yeah, through Mayor Sadikis,
[2:23:28] if I wanted to be a public wear
[2:23:30] what sort of credentials would I need to have?
[2:23:34] Well, I, through you, Madam Mayor,
[2:23:37] trust you would work for the company that you're being sworn in to.
[2:23:43] You know, we have a weights and measures
[2:23:46] department that go, that's fuel and special services.
[2:23:48] we do all of the smaller scales. This particular business, the such large volumes, we don't, we
[2:23:58] we don't have the equipment to do this. A lot of cities and towns and Massachusetts that have this
[2:24:04] type of business do swearing publicoyers.
[2:24:12] So are they so are they like civil and so mostly it's a check-in balance system it sounds like so you just you need a reliable honest person who might have some mechanical ability that would check this scales
[2:24:27] Is that it I mean why so why would why would we need like nine of those?
[2:24:34] People because do they take turns or?
[2:24:38] through you, through you matter, yes, I think they all work in different shifts in different
[2:24:45] capacities I've fostered seeing and gravel, whether it's what they're selling or what
[2:24:51] they're weighing, what materials are going out, it's a different different people.
[2:24:57] Okay, I'm just absolutely fascinated.
[2:25:00] But I never heard of the square occupation, and thank you for telling me about it. Thank you, I yield.
[2:25:07] Councillor Simmons.
[2:25:08] Thank you, Mayor Chair. I'm just kind of following up behind council, Zuzzi, and I want to thank her for raising
[2:25:14] this question, because as I was reading through the agenda and became to this particular item,
[2:25:21] one thought I had was I went to how many members actually know what these folks do, so
[2:25:25] of us do have been around for a while.
[2:25:27] Some of us might have known and didn't remember.
[2:25:30] And so I raised this and support my colleague and her queries.
[2:25:36] So I don't have any objections to concerns.
[2:25:38] But I do want to point out that the city manager
[2:25:43] should be better about providing information
[2:25:47] of sentence or to this is, you know, wait some measures.
[2:25:50] And this is what the person does
[2:25:51] because everyone doesn't know.
[2:25:53] Including the people that might be viewing in.
[2:25:55] We're not only identifying ourselves as counselors,
[2:25:57] but we're telling the people that are viewing in.
[2:25:59] So, what are these people that they're appointing?
[2:26:01] What do they do?
[2:26:02] What are they for?
[2:26:03] The other thing that we don't know,
[2:26:05] because we don't know who they are,
[2:26:07] we don't know why they're qualified for these roles,
[2:26:10] or even what the roles are.
[2:26:11] So, thank you again.
[2:26:12] That's what it now is by calling for raising that.
[2:26:15] And I just think as we go forward,
[2:26:18] it would be helpful to have some consistency
[2:26:21] across the appointments of boards and commissions,
[2:26:23] And quasi-employees, if you will, because I don't know what, really, to identify these individuals
[2:26:32] as, but having some consistency on the communication and the information that we render on these
[2:26:39] appointments that we're supposed to approve, the information in the context that we're getting
[2:26:46] is in the record and that anyone has access to it. And I think it's better for us as counselors
[2:26:51] that we know who and what we're voting to approve.
[2:26:55] So with that, I yield a floor.
[2:26:56] Thank you, Manager.
[2:26:59] Thank you, Councillor Simmons.
[2:27:00] Any other questions on this?
[2:27:05] Hearing then, the clerk claimed,
[2:27:07] Crayon, did you have your hand up?
[2:27:09] I did. I just wanted to add that these terms
[2:27:12] are usually for one year.
[2:27:14] The City Clerk's office goes out on site yearly
[2:27:17] and swiss these public wares in.
[2:27:20] I know that was a question.
[2:27:23] Thank you, Kirk.
[2:27:24] And to folks' points, I think, you know, if there's a way we can get some more information
[2:27:31] about what this is, what public wares are, so that it's on the record.
[2:27:39] Seeing no one else, we'll, on a motion by Councillor Zusie to approve the appointments and
[2:27:48] place, city manager, agenda, and before on file, we'll do a real call.
[2:27:53] Councilor LZB. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azine. Yes.
[2:27:57] Yes. Councilor Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Councilor McGuvern. Yes.
[2:28:03] Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes.
[2:28:09] Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councilor Zucy. Yes.
[2:28:13] Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes.
[2:28:16] of nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[2:28:19] The appointments have been approved and City Manager,
[2:28:22] Gender and Forest placed on file.
[2:28:24] We're moving on to City Manager agenda item of five.
[2:28:28] Transmitting communication from Ian Wong City Manager relative
[2:28:31] to the appointment, reappointment of the following people
[2:28:33] to the recycling advisory committee for terms of three years.
[2:28:38] Councillor Nolan, you have before.
[2:28:40] Thank you, Mayor Sedik.
[2:28:41] You're very excited to see this on the agenda.
[2:28:43] And the reason I pulled is I do have a question on how the appointments were made in the process by which both the reappointments and the new members, it's it's great that while there's a total of nine that are required it can be as many as 20 or 24 so this last term we spent a lot of time working to make updates to the zero waste master plan and there's been many many discussions around how it is that we can improve all of the city operations related to recycling.
[2:29:12] And part of that initiative around the changes we're making more aggressive benchmarks or
[2:29:17] dense changes to reduce waste, take the first steps for the first time toward a single
[2:30:00] This is a look at candidates who were inclined to advocate for strong improvements in waste reduction and or additionally specifically looking for candidates who would help oversight of existing and future city practices. I just want to make sure candidates for these boards and commissions.
[2:30:16] And this is just one of them, as we go through them, there will be a lot more boards and commissions are not only dedicated residents, but really able to help us perform a very critical role in oversight and management.
[2:30:28] not just given input or hearing about plans of the city, but to actually be able to inform
[2:30:36] develop, create, and push the city to be the best that it can be in these areas.
[2:30:41] And particularly for this advisor committee, I think it's critically important role,
[2:30:46] so that we can have a successful implementation of the zero waste master plan for already behind
[2:30:50] on a couple of the ideas that were supposed to be promulgated up by now, so I'm just really
[2:30:56] I wanted to understand how the process included that somewhat expanded vision for what our zero waste master plan will bring to the city and this RAC will be key to that.
[2:31:09] What are the deputy city manager?
[2:31:11] Thank you through your mayor, city key.
[2:31:14] So I think they were trying to get promoted, hopefully they did.
[2:31:17] We have Jennifer Matthews who is the deputy commissioner of public works in Michael or who is the recycling director who I will turn it over to that.
[2:31:24] can talk about respond to your questions, Councilor Nolan.
[2:31:29] Hi. This is my gore through you, Madam Mayor.
[2:31:34] So the interview process was, you know, first of all, we look at, you know, how many
[2:31:39] people applied. We look at geographic diversity of applicants. You know, we want to just make
[2:31:45] sure we have like a well-rounded group of people on the committee. But then we do look at
[2:31:50] specific qualifications like we have one candidate who was a chief communications officer
[2:31:56] and has a lot of insight as to like how to communicate around zero waste or things in the
[2:32:01] climate realm. But then we also have different kind of candidates that are maybe newer to the
[2:32:08] zero waste kind of lifestyle or lack of a better word that can offer different insights.
[2:32:14] So we like to balance different ages, different backgrounds, different parts of the city,
[2:32:20] people that are in the industry and so people that are not in the industry, so we have
[2:32:25] a representative from Harvard and MIT that are both in the zero-waste kind of like their
[2:32:31] job descriptions fully covered the zero-waste initiatives and then we have people that
[2:32:37] that have worked in industry as plastics manufacturers or different kind of individuals and
[2:32:44] circularity thing. So, I think we have a pretty well-rounded group here. It is a relatively
[2:32:50] large advisor committee, but we do like giving a lot of different people inside. When we have
[2:32:55] so many applicants that are volunteering for voluntary committee, we like to give them the opportunity.
[2:33:05] One thing I would add to that through Madam Mayor, Councillor Nolan, we are in the process of
[2:33:11] finalizing draft ordinance changes to affect the changes that were anticipated in the zero
[2:33:17] waste master plan 2.0 and one of the changes that we will be proposing that I think is consistent
[2:33:23] with some of the issues you braised is changing the name of the recycling advisory committee
[2:33:27] to the waste reduction advisory committee and really refocusing their work on zero waste initiatives
[2:33:33] broadly. So again, looking at this and thinking about it not simply as recycling but the very
[2:33:39] the varied ways that that this group will be helping to advise on zero waste initiatives.
[2:33:49] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm speaking. Thank you. My gore and Jennifer.
[2:33:54] That's terrific. It wasn't really responsive to the question though. The question really was,
[2:33:59] as we were recruiting and talking to these people, was it very clear that oversight monitoring,
[2:34:05] not just being told that the issues are not just communicating the issues,
[2:34:09] but actually taking a much more intentional approach
[2:34:15] to our zero-wise offline.
[2:34:16] We've had some successes in the zero-waste
[2:34:19] and recycling area.
[2:34:20] And we've had some really stalled out,
[2:34:22] which is part of why zero-waste master plan 2.0
[2:34:24] was really significant, exciting.
[2:34:27] However, this committee, again,
[2:34:29] like, as I've said with many of our other committees,
[2:34:31] let's really make use of the volunteers
[2:34:33] in the community who are very interested in this.
[2:34:35] So my question was that part of the interview process
[2:34:38] to let them know that they do have a role that we want them to push us and, again, go forward
[2:34:45] with this renaming the committee as good, that the other ordinance changes are ones
[2:34:48] who are really eagerly awaiting for commercial food waste, you know, and terminology matters
[2:34:53] as, you know, we thought really hard to have it be food waste, not compost, however, there's
[2:34:57] so many other things we really need to work on.
[2:35:00] And meet our goals that I'm just curious, again, in this interview process, whether that was part of the approach to ensure that people coming on are going to be the types of people who are not only capable of creating and giving input, because that's our job is into listen to them, but also have an attitude that, you know, to push the city to really do all we can, because that's what we all need and hopefully want from these boards and commissions. If that makes sense as a question, I just want to be very clear about that part of the question.
[2:35:32] Sure, through you, Madam Mayor, you know, we did talk extensively about how we do have a
[2:35:37] news zero waste master plan and we do want this committee to have a lot of
[2:35:43] kind of stake in helping us reach those goals. And you know, I think that's something that we can
[2:35:49] continue to work on is kind of like, on our monthly meetings and even between meetings, just trying
[2:35:56] to figure out like how to empower the committee as much as possible to like help push us along.
[2:36:02] to meeting these goals. I mean, it is a little bit tricky. I mean, because, you know, there's a lot of people that are coming from different backgrounds, and they may not fully understand everything in the waste world or like the operations, but, you know, as we start getting more versed, and as we get a lot of these new candidates, interested and more involved in the DPW, it'll help kind of bring out, I think, a better kind of opportunity for them to not just along. And so that's something that we can definitely look a lot more closely at.
[2:36:33] Great, thank you. And again, this is going to be triple boards and commission. I think that we're going to be doing our job better if we take advantage and really use these boards and commissions and particularly in this area. I think it's going to be critically important.
[2:36:48] As you know, I'm I'm that this is a great plan and yet it could have been even more aggressive and any other timeline is we really need to meet these timelines so we can get on to zero waste master plan.
[2:36:59] D.C.M.
[2:37:00] Walkins may not like this, but I'm already thinking of their way to master plan 3.0.
[2:37:04] Once we get through this.
[2:37:06] So thank you with that Mayor Siddiqui, I yield.
[2:37:09] I will be approving these.
[2:37:10] There's a terrific array of people.
[2:37:12] And I do hope they hear the message and the staff hear the message that we'd really love to have this group be part of the solution to so many of these issues that are critically important for the city moving forward.
[2:37:24] Thank you, I yield.
[2:37:24] Councillor Nolan yields, don't see any other questions on this item, so on a motion by Councillor
[2:37:32] Nolan to prove the appointments placed in the agenda item number five on file, will
[2:37:40] do a roll call please? Councillor Elzuby. Yes. Yes. Vice-marazine. Yes. Yes. Councillor Flaherty. Yes.
[2:37:48] Yes, Councilwoman govern. Yes. Yes, Councilor Nolan.
[2:37:57] Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons. Yes, Councilor Sabrina Wailer. Yes. Yes, Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes, Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes, and you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[2:38:10] The appointments are approved and City Manager Agenda I Amr5 is placed on file.
[2:38:17] We are moving on to City Manager Agenda I Amr7.
[2:38:20] Transmanic Communication from Ian Huang City Manager relative to the appropriation of 226,880 dollars
[2:38:29] from the Emergency Solutions grant to the grant fund Human Services salary and wages and other ordinary maintenance accounts.
[2:38:37] Councillor Simmons, you have before.
[2:38:40] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[2:38:41] So tonight we're off to rising the 226,880 dollars in emergency solutions grant funding.
[2:38:48] In every dollar of this allocation is directed to a homeless assistance and shelter operation
[2:38:53] for central services, private housing, and homelessness prevention.
[2:38:59] And so this is not discretionary spending, it is core, it is core to how we need our obligations
[2:39:05] to some of our most vulnerable residents, and the city, but at the same time I think it's important
[2:39:10] to be candid.
[2:39:13] Over the past several years, this council and the city has encountered some troubling concerns
[2:39:18] related to the experiences of people utilizing some of our local shelters.
[2:39:23] Those concerns of comfort residents, advocates, and service users themselves.
[2:39:28] They range from safety issues to dignity and respect to how complaints that we see and address.
[2:39:35] And so while the city does not directly operate these shelters, we are not without responsibility.
[2:39:41] From my point of view, when public dollars are being invested, especially federal dollars,
[2:40:00] Expectations. So, for me, oversight cannot be symbolic, accountability cannot be cosmetic. My support for this appropriation comes with the expectation that the city will most
[2:40:11] strangely assert its influence with the shelter partners. And what does that mean? That means insisting upon meaningful responses from concerns are raised,
[2:40:21] not procedural box checking or temporary fixes designated to quiet criticism. It needs a willingness to look honestly
[2:40:29] at patterns, not just individual incidents, and to push for real improvements in the practice
[2:40:35] in the culture. I particularly trust that the city manager's approaching these agreements
[2:40:40] carefully and deliberately, and that when this funding is dispersed, it is paired with
[2:40:46] clear standards, active monitoring, and sharing understanding that the partnership does not mean
[2:40:53] application of our responsibility.
[2:40:56] So our most vulnerable residents deserve better than lip service.
[2:40:59] And our partnership understand that continued public investment carries real expectations.
[2:41:05] Thank you, and I yield the floor.
[2:41:10] Thank you, Councillor Simmons.
[2:41:11] I see Councillor Susie's.
[2:41:14] For you, Mayor Siddiqui, I just wanted to thank this is great news that we got this grant.
[2:41:19] So is it a federal grant and were we anticipating it or are we just thrilled that we got this money?
[2:41:31] Do you know what I mean? Was it budgeted? Were we anticipating, is this something we get every year? Is this something new?
[2:41:36] Does this incident manage the seminar?
[2:41:39] To you, Madam Mayor, this is a federal grant that we have received for a very long time.
[2:41:46] This was, as you may recall, many of our HUD related grants were subject to conditions.
[2:41:56] Either we weren't getting the money or they were subject to conditions that it wasn't clear we could agree to.
[2:42:03] The fact that we are appropriating the money now is a result of HUD having entered into agreements which included our, and the, and if Megan still here, if you have more question, she could join in.
[2:42:21] But, which included are being able to cross out the conditions that were unacceptable because of the pending injunction in the King lawsuit that is which we've talked about a number of times here.
[2:42:42] but this particular funding, the city manager, knowing that we had the federal funding allowed
[2:42:52] us to actually contract with these shelters beginning in July because although it's not
[2:42:59] a lot of money for each of the individual shelters, they count on this money and so we were
[2:43:06] operating under the assumption that if those funds did not ultimately get released by HUD,
[2:43:14] that these would be covered through that federal stabilization fund fortunately.
[2:43:22] We now have been given authority by HUD to go ahead,
[2:43:26] and so we will be able to continue this funding to the various shelters.
[2:43:34] And if I might say something in response to Councillor Simmons, I appreciate your comments and I know that we worked closely with your office over the course of the last year, last two years.
[2:43:51] When there were some complaints and we were able to develop stronger systems for supporting individuals who had complaints in the shelters and I want to say that something which we would expect
[2:44:11] to continue to happen as we move forward.
[2:44:18] That's what's associated with you, have anything else?
[2:44:20] Yeah, I just thank you so much, and I'm so grateful, former assistant city manager,
[2:44:28] seven off that you are still here and engaged in helping us in so many different ways.
[2:44:35] Thank you so much.
[2:44:36] Through you, Madam Mayor, I just want to say, I'm just here through this weekend,
[2:44:42] and then we will have a new assistant city manager.
[2:44:45] So you will just be seeing me as a constituent no longer as the assistant city manager.
[2:44:51] Thank you. We're very lucky to have you so close by.
[2:44:55] Councillor Simmons did you have anything else?
[2:45:00] Our, our treating our clients and residents some respectfully. So thank you for that.
[2:45:07] And it's all the way. I was going to say, I thought you'd be tired, but I'm glad you're here.
[2:45:12] It's always good to see you. Are you the floor madam, too?
[2:45:16] I do not see any other hands on this. So on our motion by Councillor Simmons on the appropriation and placing city manager agenda item number seven on file will do a roll call.
[2:45:29] Councilor Elzumbi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azine. Yes. Yes. Councilor Flarrady. Yes. Yes. Councilor McGuvern. Yes. Yes.
[2:45:40] Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes.
[2:45:47] Councilor Susie. Yes. Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[2:45:53] If the money has been appropriated and city manager agenda item number seven is placed on file.
[2:46:02] We're moving on to city manager agenda item number 10.
[2:46:05] A communication transmitted from the N. Wong city manager relative to the appointment or
[2:46:09] re-appointment of the following people as possible for terms of three years.
[2:46:14] Councillor Azusa, you have the floor.
[2:46:17] Thank you so much, Mayor City.
[2:46:18] Just a quick question.
[2:46:19] And again, I know there's a constable that opens up the Harvard Commencement every year.
[2:46:25] I did a little Googling and I understand that they serve legal process, eviction, provide eviction notices and do other law enforcement.
[2:46:35] Are these usually police members of our police force that do this work?
[2:46:40] And again, is it a paid position?
[2:46:43] Is it a full-time position?
[2:46:45] Or is it an honorary position?
[2:46:53] Thank you through you Madam Mayor, so a constable is a position established under state law and we also have an ordinance on constables.
[2:47:06] We don't employ them, they're not employees of the city but it's a designation that the city is authorized to appoint someone with.
[2:47:15] Often, private security companies employ constables, or, as you mentioned, service, you know,
[2:47:25] process service servers are often, are constables.
[2:47:30] So when in constable is appointed with the power to serve process, they are process servers.
[2:47:37] And the city's role is doing a background investigation that if you want to hear more about the police commissioner can speak to, and then the city manager appoints the Constable for a term of three years.
[2:47:53] So,
[2:47:57] do we have one or do we have many?
[2:48:01] I'm not sure you might have there are multiple
[2:48:04] Constables.
[2:48:06] So when they're they're term is up there.
[2:48:08] Re-appointed or someone new is appointed.
[2:48:11] It comes up before the council.
[2:48:14] I don't know the exact number.
[2:48:16] The city manager's office might have that information of how many have been appointed.
[2:48:21] Through you, Mayor Citikey.
[2:48:22] I think councilors use to you may be thinking
[2:48:24] in terms of Harvard commencement of the middle sex sheriff,
[2:48:28] of which there is only one.
[2:48:32] OK, again, it's just a mystery to me about who these people are.
[2:48:37] So a private security firm might provide them,
[2:48:41] make them accessible to the city,
[2:48:43] and we hire them, who hires them.
[2:48:47] Did you hire them?
[2:48:49] City manager.
[2:48:49] But so if I may, through you, Madam Mayor, it's the title and the authority is designated
[2:49:00] by the City Manager by state law, but they're not city employees, they're not police officers,
[2:49:08] we do not, the city does not employ constables, just the City Manager by state law has the
[2:49:13] authority to designate to appoint someone to be a constable.
[2:49:18] And so like I said, some are employed by private security firms, some work for a process server company or themselves have a, you know, self-employed doing process serving.
[2:49:32] So that that type of work.
[2:49:35] Yeah.
[2:49:36] Thank you.
[2:49:37] Yeah, thank you so much for that clarification.
[2:49:40] I yield.
[2:49:41] Any other questions on this?
[2:49:45] Hearing none, seeing none, we'll go ahead on a motion by Councillor Zuzzi to prove the appointments and place City Manager at Gender Item 10 on file.
[2:49:57] Councillor Zuzzi.
[2:49:58] Yes.
[2:50:00] Yes. Yes, Councillor Zucing. Yes. Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative. The appointments are approved. And city manager agenda item number 10 is placed on file for moving on to city manager agenda item number 11.
[2:50:17] A communication transmitted from Iran wants to imagine relative to a waiting report item number 25-69 regarding review of the previous home real petition and preparing a new petition that would allow Cambridge and that.
[2:50:29] to real estate transfer fee to be sent to the state legislature.
[2:50:33] Councillor Nolan, you have the floor.
[2:50:36] Thank you, Mayor Sediki.
[2:50:38] I am this is an exciting time to, we have to refile this petition because the council has
[2:50:46] sent several into the state legislature each time it is not gone through, but we do have to
[2:50:51] refile it in order to be heard.
[2:50:53] There have been some questions raised about, for instance, whether we can do, we got an email
[2:50:57] about ensuring that this does not end up raising
[2:51:01] rents for multifamily zoning because that is something
[2:51:05] apparently LA is concerned about and some other housing
[2:51:09] advocates are concerned about.
[2:51:10] I did reach out to the city solicitor earlier today,
[2:51:13] and she didn't think some of the ways that the council
[2:51:16] could change us in the future would be possible,
[2:51:19] but she's not certain.
[2:51:20] So I will exercise my charter rights so that I can make sure
[2:51:22] that those questions are enforced.
[2:51:24] The next time that we are looking at this before we file it
[2:51:27] state legislature to ensure that we're all in sync with what it is that we can and may not do with
[2:51:33] this petition. But again, I'm in favor of that. I had filed some of this, but I think there's
[2:51:37] some on answer questions. Thank you, Councillor Nolan. Councillor Nolan exercises are chartered
[2:51:42] on city manager agenda item number 11.
[2:51:48] At this time, I'll entertain a motion to suspend the rules
[2:51:52] to bring forward late communication late city manager agenda item and I'm going to
[2:52:00] I'm going to other items I'm going to go to go to the co-chair of the ordinance committee
[2:52:05] Council from the government.
[2:52:08] Excuse me.
[2:52:08] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[2:52:09] Through you.
[2:52:10] There's a number of things we can do right now to bring Cambridge Street in front of us.
[2:52:15] So.
[2:52:16] I'd like to move first to suspend the rules to bring forward the late communication from the city manager,
[2:52:23] as well as the late communication from other city officers filed by yourself and Councilor Nolan.
[2:52:31] Who do roll call on bringing forward those two items?
[2:52:42] I'm sorry, Clara.
[2:52:43] Are you Councilor Azubi?
[2:52:45] Yes.
[2:52:45] Yes.
[2:52:46] Vice Mayor Azim?
[2:52:47] Yes.
[2:52:48] Yes.
[2:52:48] Council of the Flaherty?
[2:52:49] Yes.
[2:52:49] Yes, Council of McGuvern? Yes. Yes, Councilor Nolan? Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons? Yes.
[2:52:58] Yes, Councilor Sabrina Wheeler? Yes. Yes, Councilor Zucy? Yes. Yes. Yes, Mayor Sediki? Yes. Yes.
[2:53:04] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative. So we have the lead. The need manager agenda item.
[2:53:11] That's the revisions to Cambridge Street.
[2:53:14] So any petition and the communications from other city officers, we have one more vote council member govern?
[2:53:21] Yeah, I think we should move suspension to bring forward.
[2:53:25] But we have to vote to take the chambered street zoning off the table.
[2:53:30] So I like to move suspension to do that.
[2:53:34] Councilor Alzubi.
[2:53:36] Yes.
[2:53:37] Yes.
[2:53:37] Vice Mayor Zene.
[2:53:39] Council of Larrady.
[2:53:41] Yes.
[2:53:41] Yes.
[2:53:43] Yes. Yes, Councillor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[2:53:47] Councillor Simmons. Yes. Yes.
[2:53:50] Councillor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes.
[2:53:52] Councillor Susie. Yes. Yes.
[2:53:56] Yes. Yes. Yes.
[2:53:58] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[2:54:02] Madam Mayor, I'll turn it back to you for discussion.
[2:54:06] And then depending on how that goes,
[2:54:07] they're potential other votes after that. Great. Thank you, Councillor. We're
[2:54:12] governed. So we have multiple items before us. We have the City Manager
[2:54:21] late. The revisions. We have the communication from other city officers. The actual
[2:54:26] petition itself. I'll go to Councillor Nolan to talk about the communication from
[2:54:30] other city officers. Thank you. But before we do that, Mayor
[2:54:34] to seek the late communication from city manager.
[2:54:39] Is that on grant a kiss or whatever the new system is?
[2:54:45] I'm just making sure that we all have access to it.
[2:54:47] Or was it email to us or?
[2:54:49] Yeah, it was for very-
[2:54:51] I'm just having trouble seeing it on the regular screen now,
[2:54:56] but I know it was email to us separately.
[2:54:57] So I guess we could just use that.
[2:55:01] Yes, all of us should have it and remind our standing that it was also on the
[2:55:10] We can have Naya, we pull it up as well, or someone.
[2:55:18] Can you imagine if you want to say anything?
[2:55:20] Through your university, I believe the meeting portal is updated,
[2:55:25] and so it is showing up as an agenda item number 12 on the city manager's agenda,
[2:55:32] but it did go off late.
[2:55:37] Okay, thank you.
[2:55:43] Yeah, so if I think all of our colleagues receiving as part of the agenda may or
[2:55:49] seducing I worked on the chemistry petition.
[2:55:52] This is a compromise from what was originally on the agenda.
[2:55:58] There's a it's laid out in the memo company in this.
[2:56:02] these zoning changes which respond to many of the community feedback that we have, this is
[2:56:10] as in any time we take on a very important and also quite far reaching zoning
[2:56:19] conversation across the city. There are a range of voices. There are people who would like
[2:56:24] something the original or something even more aggressive. There are people who want nothing. There are
[2:56:30] people who wants everything in between.
[2:56:33] And thank you, Mayor Siddiqui, for working with me on what seems to me to be, and I hope
[2:56:38] the council agrees, to be a reasonable compromise of ensuring that a development can happen
[2:56:44] and will happen in line with many of the goals of the community, including some additional
[2:56:48] setbacks, some open space, allowing housing.
[2:56:51] We have already put in place the process by which we would look at ground floor retail, which
[2:56:58] was something that Jason Alex from the East Cambridge Business Association, many of the other small business owners, Patrick McGee, also signed a letter, encouraged us to pass these amendments and then pass the zoning instead of waiting.
[2:57:11] I know there are many people who are disappointed that I have said that when these, if these amendments pass that I will be supporting the,
[2:57:18] the underlying zoning petition instead of letting it expire.
[2:57:23] We can always improve things and I don't believe in acting in a way that is
[2:57:30] Capricious or just too quickly.
[2:57:32] However, this process has been going on for several years.
[2:57:35] These amendments are very much in line with the R Cambridge State Work that a huge range of people in the city were involved in.
[2:57:41] So I'm very glad that we are presenting this to the council.
[2:57:44] we hope that they pass so that we can more than as a city and adopt the petition tonight,
[2:57:49] which before it expires, and then move on to a range of other issues that the city is facing.
[2:57:54] I'm going to trip you want me to go on to more detail on this. Mayor Sediki, it is laid out
[2:57:58] in a memo, but I'm happy to talk a little bit more about it. That isn't raised by our colleagues
[2:58:02] in the ensuing discussion.
[2:58:06] Thank you, Councillor Nolan. You know, I think we can open it up.
[2:58:11] two questions and comments. So I have confidence in. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So happy to support
[2:58:21] these amendments. I did want to say that, you know, from my perspective, it's a very, very mild improvement
[2:58:29] over the current zoning. You know, Cambridge Street is already six stories. This would keep it six stories. The leach
[2:58:35] your parcel, you know, before it was 15 in the Cambridge Street Study was 12 this would bring
[2:58:40] you down to 10 but already it's been zoned or permitted for six at 11 and a half percent inclusionary.
[2:58:46] So the odds that someone would re permitted at 20 just to get to 10 which is kind of a dead zone
[2:58:51] I think is unlikely. The only, I think, new housing work expected to get from this is the
[2:58:57] Webster Street parcel which is something but also I would say that, you know, with this plus the
[2:59:03] changes open space and the follow-up will do on first floor retail, which is even less profitable
[2:59:09] than housing, means that overall, I think that Cambridge Street, once it's all done, will make housing
[2:59:15] harder to pencil in the city, not easier. Having said that, a lot of work has been done by city staff,
[2:59:23] this is now more restricted than the Cambridge Street study presented, and I think that it's important
[2:59:28] for us to, you know, feel like we finished our process, even if I'm not entirely excited
[2:59:33] about the results, but, you know, thank you to Councillor Nolan and Mayor Siddiqui for coming
[2:59:38] together and trying to get us something that helps us get this over the finish line.
[2:59:43] Hi, we'll go to Councillor Gibbons Arena Wheeler.
[3:00:00] Madam Mayor, believe other folks out there can't stop if anybody wants to go first. I'm happy to go.
[3:00:05] I really appreciate the amendment from Councillor Nolan and sort of the thought that went to it.
[3:00:11] Just briefly on the amendment itself that I'm, we'll be at a note for the same reasons.
[3:00:14] I was the know on the previous amendment and the amendment on Massav and that's because anything above six stories is in the range where we're getting inclusionary housing.
[3:00:23] So if we're reducing from eight stories to six stories, those are two stories where we're going to be getting affordable housing.
[3:00:28] I just can't cautionably reduce that. I do expect the amendment will pass that and so on the underlying
[3:00:34] petition, you know, I have spent a bunch of time over the last few weeks and months
[3:00:39] looking at the current buildings on Cambridge Street, looking at the lot sizes on Cambridge Street,
[3:00:43] looking at the city's building permit log to see what is being built under the current zoning
[3:00:47] that log is all online in public. I think the important context for this discussion tonight
[3:00:52] is that whether this proposal passes or not, buildings are going to continue to be redeveloped on
[3:00:57] like they are now, whether the council does anything or if we just, we just call it an A right now,
[3:01:01] buildings are going to keep happening. The choice is not between development and no development.
[3:01:05] The choice is between shorter buildings that are 100% market rate, which is what we're getting now,
[3:01:10] or slightly taller buildings that are going to create hundreds of new affordable homes.
[3:01:15] The buildings that are being now are like the one I came up with my research on Cambridge Street.
[3:01:20] It's right near the King Open School in the Valente Library branch.
[3:01:24] was built in 2024. You can find it on the city's development log and on Zillow if you're curious
[3:01:29] which one exactly I'm talking about. It's a six unit, four story building, it replaced the
[3:01:34] existing building and each of the units in that building was built recently, sold for around
[3:01:40] a million dollars or more. One of them sold for 1.75 million dollars which the vast majority of
[3:01:46] folks in Cambridge cannot afford and that building had zero affordable housing in it because it was
[3:01:51] less than 10 units, which is where the city's inclusionary zoning picks in.
[3:01:55] That is what's being built right now, and that's when it's going to continue to get built on
[3:01:59] Cambridge Street if we take no action, $1 million units and no affordable housing.
[3:02:03] The affordable housing overlay that we've passed has worked really well in a lot of places.
[3:02:07] It has not worked on quarters like Cambridge Street for a number of reasons.
[3:02:10] We've not seen a HO projects there, and there's basically no IZ units there being built on Cambridge Street.
[3:02:15] When we talked about the multifamily housing ordinance to end exclusionary zoning last term.
[3:02:20] There are many folks who argued it wouldn't actually lead to affordable housing,
[3:02:23] that is not what's happened in a reality. We've seen lots of six-story buildings with affordable
[3:02:28] housing and them being proposed even under the current economic conditions.
[3:02:32] Anything with the objections we're hearing at that there's too many six-story buildings
[3:02:35] with affordable housing being proposed and we should have shorter buildings that are all market rate.
[3:02:39] And I disagree with that. There's no reason to think that we would see different
[3:02:44] result here on Cambridge Street where the lots are similar sizes and corridors are more
[3:02:48] effective for taller buildings. This is the place that everybody says. We should be having taller
[3:02:52] buildings. That's where we're going to see taller buildings with affordable housing. I appreciate
[3:02:59] the amendment from Councillor Nolan and really worked to engage on this and figure out how to get
[3:03:05] to yes. I think the main concerns I heard the last few times we talked about this was that about the
[3:03:10] height. Eight stories being total. Parts was being total. That's been addressed. The local businesses
[3:03:17] might be impacted. The local business association as we've heard tonight is in favor of this.
[3:03:22] With the the amendments that the concerns that folks get bring a report were addressed.
[3:03:26] So when it comes to say they would really like to vote for a proposal because they care about
[3:03:29] affordable housing, but they can't because they're there's an important concern and then the the concern
[3:03:34] gets addressed. And then then there's another concern. It begins to be a little like
[3:03:38] sort of Lucy in the football from Charlie Brown sort of pulling it out the last minute.
[3:03:42] If you say what you want more housing and corridors, but this isn't quite right. You come
[3:03:46] bring an amendment work on it. I really appreciate Councillor Nolan for doing that.
[3:03:49] I mean, the reason similar reason we passed the multi-family housing ordinance,
[3:03:52] eight to one was not because we had city counselors totally in lockstap,
[3:03:55] because we worked together and we had amendments and changes and we got to something.
[3:04:00] I think the last piece I want to make on this was something I've been thinking about a lot recently,
[3:04:04] you know, in the last term there was a vote to delay bike lanes on Cambridge Street and the
[3:04:08] arguments and favor of not making any changes there was that needed more time for study and
[3:04:14] progress before we did any changes to Cambridge Street. I listened to those arguments, I heard
[3:04:18] them, I sat with them, but I voted against that delay because I have gotten to know a number
[3:04:22] of people whose loved ones were killed by King on Cambridge Street. I could not bear to be responsible
[3:04:26] for another death due to delay. We know this will create more affordable housing, which is the
[3:04:33] main question I need answered, and it feels hypocritical for me to vote for an additional delay
[3:04:37] here when we know the answer already. The people who need affordable housing are just as important to
[3:04:43] every month, every week, every day matters to that person whose life could be changed by having a affordable housing.
[3:04:49] I gave this a little more time from December because we had another big proposal on North Mass Ave.
[3:04:53] We've given that more time.
[3:04:55] We're not getting any more housing on Cambridge Street under the status quo, and I can't defend that.
[3:05:02] Thank you, Mayor Siddiqui. I have a couple points of information. So, one, someone brought up during public testimony that with the six stories, does that, would that be for admin square as well? So, that's one question.
[3:05:20] And another is a question, is some have suggested that there wouldn't be inclusionary at six stories?
[3:05:33] And is that true or not? And then third of all, will we be discussing the overall zoning proposal for Cambridge Street afterwards?
[3:05:42] should I be sharing all my thoughts about the proposal right here and now. So those are my three questions.
[3:05:50] So this is the space for all of it. Okay, so can you maybe through you Mayor City,
[3:05:59] can you maybe Assistant City Manager Peters can answer whether this whether Inmond Square would be
[3:06:07] Six stories or eight stories with this amendment?
[3:06:11] Yes, thank you for the question, Councillor Zuzzi, through you, Mayor Siddiqui,
[3:06:16] Invin Square, under this revised petition text, is that six stories?
[3:06:21] Okay, so everything is six stories except for Webster Windsor, which would be ten to twelve
[3:06:27] and then Leachmeer would be ten.
[3:06:29] this thought.
[3:06:30] Webster, Webster Windsor would be at 12, and then bleach merit is at 10 under these proposed amendments.
[3:06:38] Okay. Great. And then maybe through you, Mayor Sadiki, maybe for our solicitor, or
[3:06:44] one of our solicitors, I'd love to understand, so there, some have suggested that, you
[3:06:50] know, so we know currently when we pass multi-family housing, or when you pass multi-family
[3:06:58] housing that the six stories along all our quarters, all of the quarters were upzoned so that
[3:07:05] we would still be incentivizing taller buildings on the quarters. So the question is, so are we
[3:07:14] so is it still if you're building six stories two stories or 20% is inclusionary or is that not
[3:07:23] part of the six stories on Cambridge Street now.
[3:07:32] So, so maybe I'll take the first attempt at that in Solster Bear, can jump in as needed.
[3:07:38] But the current inclusionary zoning ordinance, as you know, applies for any project over 10,000 square feet or 10 units.
[3:07:47] It's part of the conversation around this Cambridge Street in the Mass Ave,
[3:07:52] Resonings.
[3:07:53] The City Council contemplated an amendment that we've included in this draft,
[3:07:58] that would require projects over six stories to be subject to inclusionary,
[3:08:05] regardless if they met that 10,000 square foot threshold.
[3:08:10] So that would require projects to be inclusionary.
[3:08:13] I did want to note that, you know, there's been a lot of talk that a lot of projects
[3:08:19] could, you know, we'll go up to six stories or five stories without meeting the inclusionary
[3:08:27] zoning requirement. Given the size of the parcels that we consider soft size or
[3:08:34] developmental sites, we are quite significantly over that 10,000 square foot threshold. So
[3:08:40] There's always a case where someone could significantly underbuild their site, but just given
[3:08:45] the likelihood in the developers' desire to maximize development potential, we do think
[3:08:52] it's going to be over 10,000 square feet, and then certainly with this additional requirement
[3:08:59] and includes rezoning would be required.
[3:09:03] Okay, again, through you, Mayor City, thank you.
[3:09:08] Assistant City Manager, Peter, so much for that,
[3:09:12] explain or that clarification.
[3:09:15] So, so it's likely that some affordable units will be built
[3:09:20] but we don't have any calculated calculation of how many,
[3:09:25] we're not, we have no idea how much affordable
[3:09:29] units will be built, right? And if people are building over six stories, so this would
[3:09:34] allow people to build over six stories. So if they want to build over six stories,
[3:09:39] then do they have what do they have? If they want to go to eight stories and build inclusionary
[3:09:45] units, what reviews would they have to, they wouldn't need a special permit to what was they
[3:09:54] to go through.
[3:09:56] Yeah, thank you for your mayor, City G.
[3:10:00] So, the special permit, threshold, kicks in at 75,000 square feet. So, projects exceed that, they would have to go at the planning board for a special permit.
[3:10:12] We do have design review at different thresholds. So, all of these projects would go through staff review and different degrees of advisory or project review with staff and public meetings.
[3:10:28] What I don't understand though is if the street is zone for six stories, if someone wanted to go to eight stories, what would they have to do?
[3:10:39] The street is zone for six stories.
[3:10:42] Yes, so thank you for clarifying the question.
[3:10:46] So if this proposed amendment were to pass and the cap was six stories, you could not go
[3:10:53] to eight stories regardless if you were to get an additional permit.
[3:10:57] So six stories would be the cap.
[3:10:59] Except in those, again, those two areas on Cambridge Street that we've said could go potentially
[3:11:07] up to 10 or 12.
[3:11:08] So, but if long the corridor and men's square, if you could only build up to six stories.
[3:11:16] So, there would not be any inclusionary units in this story building.
[3:11:20] So, unless they're over 10,000 square feet.
[3:11:22] That's correct.
[3:11:23] Correct.
[3:11:25] So, here's, okay.
[3:11:27] So, over the weekend, I attended the Mass Municipal Association meeting at the Convention Center in Boston.
[3:11:34] And so I was walking down Summer Street, which is a much wider street.
[3:11:39] It's about the width of MassAv.
[3:11:42] So it's 90, I guess MassAv isn't about 100 feet or anyway.
[3:11:47] Summer Street is 98 feet.
[3:11:49] So it's a very broad avenue.
[3:11:51] And there are beautiful brick buildings there that are five story, six stories, seven stories.
[3:11:58] And then of course there's some taller buildings as you get deeper into the support district.
[3:12:02] But what walking down that street made me realize is, like those buildings really looked handsome on that wide street.
[3:12:13] But I really worry about Cambridge Street. I think I also walked Cambridge Street on a very, very cold day last week.
[3:12:24] And we were walking on the south side of the street, and it was very cold, but we had sun because the buildings on the other side of the street were lower.
[3:12:35] So we could still be in the sunlight.
[3:12:37] So what I'm aware of since it's an east west street, that if we build Cambridge Street taller, like to even six stories, we really need setbacks.
[3:12:51] A setback would allow for light to penetrate the street so that it isn't a dark corridor in the winter.
[3:13:02] So I do worry about that and I feel like the proper from my walk of Cambridge Street.
[3:13:08] I really feel as though for or six stories or four stories with a ten-foot stepback is what would really be best for Cambridge Street.
[3:13:18] But I realize that is an under consideration at this point.
[3:13:24] I think six stories is much better than eight stories.
[3:13:27] But I think that the step back at four stories will really be critical.
[3:13:34] What I worry about, the other thing that's come to my realization is like how much I love
[3:13:40] Cambridge Street.
[3:13:41] Because I think I feel like it's the last vestige of a street with local retail
[3:13:47] in the city. I mean, it's rich with local retail. It's rich with ethnic businesses, you know, organizations, residents, there's a great diversity there.
[3:15:00] Developers without any guarantee of the production of affordable units or any community benefits.
[3:15:08] I feel as though it's too much that we're giving away. I do think it makes sense to have more height in the Webster Windsor area.
[3:15:18] I really appreciate that as a place that could use more height.
[3:15:22] And I think you could have more height at Leachmeer, though I feel for the people in the
[3:15:28] chocolate factory across the street, because they're like, well, be blocked.
[3:15:32] I mean, I really hope DIVCO West does build a sixth story building there, because I do
[3:15:36] think it would be more in keeping with neighborhood.
[3:15:41] And I worry about all the concerns Cambridge Street residents have shared.
[3:15:48] They're already as a lot of congestion.
[3:15:49] There's a great concern about no parking minimum and adding density to the street.
[3:15:55] There's a, you know, concerns about labs.
[3:15:58] I, I, I will support this amendment because I think six stories is better than eight stories.
[3:16:04] But overall, I, I think we should, like, wait a month.
[3:16:11] Maybe this should go to neighborhood and long-term planning for further discussion.
[3:16:15] But I think we should work out the kinks of the zoning and like consider the step-backs
[3:16:21] Consider other things people have discussed like they're really worried about the wet labs apparently
[3:16:26] They're already arson wet labs on Cambridge street
[3:16:31] So residents don't want them there
[3:16:34] I think we should make sure we're gonna get inclusionary units. I think we should make sure that we're gonna get that first floor retail
[3:16:44] I think the ideas residents have shared during public testimony about saying
[3:16:51] smaller, requiring smaller ground floor retail should be part of the zoning way pass.
[3:16:59] And we do want to discourage banks and larger businesses.
[3:17:03] So putting in something about you can't have huge spaces for banks.
[3:17:09] I think that would be important to include as well.
[3:17:11] So, again, I will support this amendment because I think six stories is much better for
[3:17:19] then eight stories on that street.
[3:17:20] I think when we think about up zoning, we have to really think about the context of the
[3:17:25] neighborhood and the access of the street and look at shadow studies and I wish, assistant
[3:17:37] city manager, Peter's, I wish, I think it's really important.
[3:17:40] And I know you've got the tools to share what the street would look like at four stories,
[3:17:46] what it would look like at six stories, what it would look like with the ten foot step back
[3:17:50] at four stories, what it would look like at eight stories, what it would look like with ten
[3:17:54] stories.
[3:17:54] I think it's really important that you as the head of the planning department share those
[3:18:00] images with us.
[3:18:01] So we understand the implications of the zoning that we're considering.
[3:18:06] And then also it would be good to have stats to really better understand.
[3:18:11] I thought I actually really thought that our Cambridge Street study was strong.
[3:18:16] But you know what it talks about is the goals are support small businesses.
[3:18:20] And I worry this will force them out.
[3:18:25] It'll improve mobility while our bike lanes will improve mobility.
[3:18:29] It'll increase housing supply, especially affordable housing.
[3:18:32] But again, it doesn't look like we're going to be increasing affordable housing, increase public open space. I don't see this increasing public open space that seems like we need to be adding a 15% requirement for open space.
[3:18:47] have a few people anyway. So those are my thoughts. I am committed to
[3:18:55] up zoning or coming up with thoughtful zoning for Cambridge Street, but I don't think we're there
[3:19:01] and I think we should hold off. Let this petition expire and and be a little bit more thoughtful
[3:19:08] and then push something through in the next month or two with the corrections that people
[3:19:13] recommend it. Thank you, I yield. We'll go to Councilor Zubi and Councilor Mugover next.
[3:19:19] Thank you, Mayor Sediki. I'm going to specifically speak on the amendment piece and later on
[3:19:24] the final petition after we vote on this amendment for clarity. I want to share why I will abstain
[3:19:30] on this amendment. I currently don't feel like I've been a part of the process around the
[3:19:35] zoning petition and my concerns are deeper than just the height of the buildings. I'm right now
[3:19:41] focused on who gets to benefit from the new buildings, not just how tall they are, I appreciate
[3:19:46] that a last minute deal has been struck and that this will likely move forward tonight, but
[3:19:52] that's not how I think we should do this work and it's not how I hope we do this work going forward
[3:19:57] and again, I'd love to speak to the overall-
[3:20:00] Sure, yeah. So on the second half of the overall petition, and again, I really purchased from the side of clarity for residents to understand the two pieces.
[3:20:09] I also want to be clear about why I will be voting no on the overall zoning petition tonight over the last few weeks.
[3:20:17] Things have been very intensive listening to community perspectives understanding the particulars of this petition, getting up to speed on zoning more broadly.
[3:20:24] I mean, I'm I'm grateful to have had the opportunity to weigh in and disrupt the status quo on housing in our city
[3:20:31] But with that said, I don't feel like I've been a part of this process thoroughly enough
[3:20:35] I would have appreciated a committee hearing time pack the issue
[3:20:39] But I also understand that you all went through that last term and that there's a desire to finish this tonight
[3:20:44] It's just hard for me right now to coast sign on a process that I was in part of that I didn't help shape
[3:20:50] Especially when there are concerns about how it went and pieces that aren't in the zoning
[3:20:54] and I can't ignore those in good faith.
[3:20:57] My thinking is more fundamental than how tall the buildings will be.
[3:21:03] I want us to think more about who will ultimately benefit from the buildings,
[3:21:07] the affordability aspect.
[3:21:09] I want us to consider working-class people in our city,
[3:21:12] our educators, our service workers and others,
[3:21:14] who largely probably won't be able to benefit at all
[3:21:17] outside of the subsidized units if they're built.
[3:21:20] At the core of the issue,
[3:21:21] I cannot vote to give developers additional value until I can tell our constituents with confidence that our 20% inclusionary housing will actually be delivered.
[3:21:32] We must refuse to hand over massive development rates to private capital without that guarantee.
[3:21:36] Our inclusionary zoning requirement is legally reliant on the economic justification study from 2016 that is now out of date.
[3:21:44] And the new feasibility study arrives in just five months, that's June of 2026, and that's on top of the lawsuit we're now navigating.
[3:21:52] So the next study arriving in June will likely show that the 20% is not economically justifiable under the conditions of this current moment.
[3:22:00] And face with that, the Council will inevitably vote to lower the inclusionary percentage to whatever the study claims is just a file, which I'm quite concerned about.
[3:22:08] And then the question on the promise for inclusionary zoning being at 20% in this zoning petition will pretty much evaporate.
[3:22:16] What makes it really especially difficult for me to support this tonight is we're giving away our leverage for free.
[3:22:23] The taller heights in additional density contemplated in this petition are incredibly valuable to developers.
[3:22:28] And if we were to frame these as a density bonus, condition, condition explicitly on delivering 20% affordable housing,
[3:22:34] And rather than giving them away in the base zoning, which we have under section 11.203,
[3:22:40] we would preserve our ability to maintain that 20% requirement, even if the next study
[3:22:44] forces us slower the base requirement.
[3:22:46] I mean, we had this conversations even in the last year.
[3:22:50] So under the density bonus framework developers who want to build these new heights would
[3:22:53] have to deliver 20% of fortability, those that don't want to meet the threshold can build
[3:22:58] to whatever the base zoning allows with whatever lower percentage the next study supports.
[3:23:02] And this is one way we might actually be able to guarantee affordability outcomes, rather than making promises that we probably know will be broken.
[3:23:11] 20% is the minimum threshold we can accept for economically stratified buildings to also feel dignified and integrated.
[3:23:19] And especially according to our own resident experience study, 50% of renters in inclusionary units reported experiencing bias where race was seen as the primary cause.
[3:23:27] So it's obvious that as the buildings get more economically segregated by race and class, the potential for harm increases.
[3:23:35] But I also just want to address directly the argument that waiting until June 2026 will delay housing production because for me, it's not about a delay.
[3:23:44] It's about doing our due diligence.
[3:23:46] Developers right now are waiting to see where inclusionary program lands.
[3:23:50] And why would they move forward with projects under 20% requirement when they know that in five months we might just lower that to 12 or 15%.
[3:23:56] percent. So in a way, our failure to resolve on this uncertainty is in itself freezing development.
[3:24:04] The position acts as a subzone significant portions of Cambridge Street, which, again, gives developers
[3:24:09] really go right to extract significantly more value from the land while the legal foundation for our
[3:24:14] only community benefit is most likely crumbling beneath us. And I also want to just talk about
[3:24:20] who benefits from rushing this through. It's not working class contributions who desperately need
[3:24:24] affordable housing, it's not small developers who are frozen out by the market by financing
[3:24:28] costs.
[3:24:29] Anyways, it's landowners and large developers who want to lock in new development rights
[3:24:34] before the inclusionary program is legally tested before we've had the chance to structure
[3:24:38] this as a density bonus.
[3:24:40] Right now, the alternative is right in front of us.
[3:25:00] We have our own rep. My colleague, who's indicated that the state would entertain a proposal, as part of the June 2026 state capital budget, if something actionable were submitted. So we know that social housing is built by the public for the public remain inter remain for the public. And it's proven that it works, but it is available to us right now, if we choose to prioritize it. Yet in this policy order, the council that had passed last September, it was unceremoniously white from the awaiting report,
[3:25:28] list without the report back from the manager that was requested.
[3:25:31] The December hearing was informative, a good start, but produced no productive
[3:25:35] progress from staff. I have to ask why because my assumption is most likely that
[3:25:40] staff are being asked to spend all their time running from a zoning petition to another,
[3:25:45] essentially chasing the false blagues that we can build our way out of the affordability crisis
[3:25:49] through inclusionary zoning alone. So I'm hoping that we can spend the next five months prioritizing
[3:25:54] social housing and getting a proposal together for the state capital budget. And when the next
[3:25:59] study arrives in June, we have a serious conversation about restructuring our approach. And if we
[3:26:04] aren't facing or focusing on solutions like social housing that actually decommodify housing and treated
[3:26:09] as a human right, we'll almost be trading the line of reburining gentrification as abundance.
[3:26:15] My bottom line is observing conversations are usually framed as creating opportunity for working
[3:26:19] class people which can be true but oftentimes they serve profit and not people and right now
[3:26:25] we're being asked to give away development rights while the only mechanism we have to ensure
[3:26:30] community benefit is under intense legal and economic threat. The only emergency we're facing tonight
[3:26:37] is again the affordable housing crisis as we all know and this potential this petition specifically
[3:26:42] has written with the inclusionary requirement that will likely not be relevant in five months.
[3:26:47] It is going to be making things worse by transferring
[3:26:50] while to landowners without a guarantee of meaningful community benefits.
[3:26:54] I'm open to voting yes on zoning proposals that deliver meaningful guaranteed community benefits.
[3:26:59] I just need to feel confident with what we can deliver on affordability when proceeding with these.
[3:27:04] And I don't think this petition does that for me right now at this time.
[3:27:08] I know we can do better and we should all yield.
[3:27:12] I'll go to a council member government and then a council authority.
[3:27:17] Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you.
[3:27:19] There's a lot here.
[3:27:21] I had a statement that I'm going to go a little bit off that for a second.
[3:27:26] First, I want to address the continued suggestion that rushing this through.
[3:27:33] This is better conversation that's been going on for years.
[3:27:37] And this council, this is why I felt it was important for the previous council
[3:27:41] to take ownership of this good or bad
[3:27:45] Because we were the ones that were doing the work and I understand that it's probably difficult if you are a new counselor to be coming on in the last minute and being asked to take a very difficult and controversial vote.
[3:27:56] And so I still believe that we should have taken responsibility and people are going to get mad when I'm getting mad at us because we were the ones that have been doing this.
[3:28:06] But that doesn't mean it's rushed and I don't believe that this has been rushed.
[3:28:13] Second of all, you know, when we hear, when folks say, you know, I support building
[3:28:20] more housing, but then list off 15 other things that they want addressed that make building
[3:28:26] that housing impossible to actually build.
[3:28:32] Not that those things are important, setbacks, setbacks, trees, all of those things.
[3:28:36] But if you put so many requirements that you then make it impossible to build the housing,
[3:28:46] you allegedly say you want, then you're not going to get it.
[3:28:50] And no one zoning ordinance is going to solve all the hills that we have,
[3:28:57] which is why we have to have multiple tools.
[3:29:01] We need social housing.
[3:29:02] We need inclusionary zoning.
[3:29:04] we need market rent housing, so this ordinance is not necessarily going to solve every single problem that everybody has and that we all share.
[3:29:16] So, I'll just say that, you know, I continue to believe we have a housing shortage, and I think that allowing eight stories on Cambridge Street would provide more homes for people, more customers for our local businesses, and more inclusionary units.
[3:29:31] Toler buildings will deliver more low income units through IZ and let's remember that close to 50% of the people who live in inclusionary units are less than the minimum income requirements.
[3:29:44] The qualified for IZ and they are in those units because of vouchers including many formerly on-house people.
[3:29:53] So in order to get more inclusionary units when you limit the amount of units that can be built,
[3:29:57] you're going to therefore get less inclusionary units.
[3:30:00] Housing or for a voucher, but are still paying about 50% or income on rent. That is the middle
[3:30:06] class of Cambridge now. And those are the folks who earn too much money to get any kind of help
[3:30:13] or subsidy, but those are the ones who are leaving because after a couple years they can no longer
[3:30:19] pay 50% or income on rent. So those people are going to suffer too. But I will say, in terms
[3:30:27] of the amendments, I don't believe that there are six votes to pass this ordinance without
[3:30:35] the amendments.
[3:30:40] And I do believe that we need to pass this. I think it is better than
[3:30:47] the current zoning. It is a step forward. Unfortunately, it is not the leap forward that
[3:30:54] think we need if we're going to address our housing shortage, but it is better to pass this
[3:31:02] and to not pass this. I don't think taking two more months for more community conversation
[3:31:06] is going to make that much of a difference. I think people who, the same people who are upset about
[3:31:14] age stories and six stories on the corridors or the same people who are upset about that on mass
[3:31:23] I don't think that's going to change.
[3:31:27] So I think we've had the conversation, I will vote for the amendments, I will vote for the
[3:31:32] final ordinance.
[3:31:33] Again, I think it's not what I think we need, but it's better than what we have, thank you
[3:31:40] men and men.
[3:31:41] And I do, before I go, I do want to thank our staff who, let's see, D.D., our professional
[3:31:47] staff who worked really, really hard on this and I know how difficult it is to balance all
[3:31:52] different visions and wants and desires in the community because there are so many different
[3:31:58] opinions. And I do want to just make sure that I appreciate you. Thank you.
[3:32:03] Thank you, Kasim or Governor. Casa Ferdin?
[3:32:09] Thank you, Madam Mayor and through you.
[3:32:13] It's a complicated issue. And I don't think anyone here denies their fact.
[3:32:20] I will say, like Councilor Al Zubi, I was not a part of the public process, and I regret
[3:32:27] that because I know that there was a valuable exchange of ideas, and I know that say, staff,
[3:32:37] spent an exhaustible effort on all of this.
[3:32:41] But I'm here to represent the people who voted for me, and I'm not going to have those people
[3:32:48] in disenfranchised because I was not involved in that public process. So I'm going to
[3:32:58] I'm in favor of allowing the petition to expire and I'm also not going to support this well-intentioned
[3:33:07] amendment because as Council McGuven just mentioned, I don't want to see an amendment pass.
[3:33:14] I would like to see the entire petition expire and I speak about this issue from I come from maybe a more global issue
[3:33:26] standpoint of viewpoint, then many of my brother and sister counselors do because I fully
[3:33:34] recognize, appreciate and understand that our housing shortage issue is a regional issue.
[3:33:41] This is not a local issue. This is not a Cambridge only issue. We don't live in a silo.
[3:33:47] This is something that we're experiencing, regionally, nationally, and in my lifetime,
[3:33:53] the city of Cambridge has done it continues to do more than all of the other 351 cities
[3:33:59] in towns and Massachusetts to alleviate the housing shortage. And we have done that.
[3:34:06] And over the last maybe decade, in partnership with the State and the federal government
[3:34:12] would spend $2.2 billion on the green line extension to make the communities of some
[3:34:19] of all the method easily accessible to the high-paying jobs in Kendall Square, yet in
[3:34:27] the wake of all of that, the city council and the last term, I guess in February 10th of
[3:34:35] decided that we should upzone the entire city. Every block, every street, every neighborhood,
[3:34:41] any size one. So as of right, on any size one, a structure of four stores can be built,
[3:34:51] thereby incentivizing the demolition of single two family and three family homes without any element of a
[3:35:00] Resolving, ordinance, which has dramatic negative impacts on the city as a whole.
[3:35:07] And if we take it to its logical, some people would say,
[3:35:11] Firm-wongering conclusion, and we consider the availability of money at a maybe a major
[3:35:19] real estate developers' hands to be deployed to the city of Cambridge.
[3:35:24] He would recognize and let's say, for example, just hypothetically, that person's name might be Donald Trump.
[3:35:31] He would recognize the massive investment opportunity in the city of Cambridge.
[3:35:37] And in one generation, we could eradicate this city, and lose neighborhoods.
[3:35:43] And I look at the city of Cambridge in its future as a sustainable city.
[3:35:48] One way we're doing all we can to support and incentivize families here in the city so that we remain
[3:35:56] the historically fabulous place to live and raise a family.
[3:36:00] And I think that that multifamily housing zoning ordinance has the unintended consequences
[3:36:08] of the fairity that's before us.
[3:36:11] So you have to know what's back.
[3:36:12] I'm trying to link it to this and I'm by linking it to this.
[3:36:17] I think that it creates, in my view, a dangerous precedent, and I think that the
[3:36:25] up zoning of Cambridge Street does the exact same thing in that region. It creates an
[3:36:31] as of right development of six stories along that corridor, which in turn will have the same
[3:36:38] impact of causing the displacement of the middle class in that region of Cambridge. And I think
[3:36:44] It's a bad idea.
[3:36:46] I'm fully in favor of the up zoning on the Webster Avcarta,
[3:36:50] because I think it's appropriate.
[3:36:52] And like Councilor Alzubi,
[3:36:54] I think that we have as a city when we allow these zoning
[3:37:00] amendments like this one, we're giving up our leverage.
[3:37:05] And if we do anything in terms of housing development,
[3:37:09] along the Cambridge Recorder to six stories, eight stories, ten stories, all of this should be through
[3:37:17] every view which requires a special permit hearing with community involvement, the opportunity
[3:37:24] for input, and with specific capacity to be met. And without that component in this particular
[3:37:35] zoning woodenance. And again, without being involved in the public process, I would have to,
[3:37:42] you know, for the racket, not that it makes any difference at this point, but I have to say that I,
[3:37:48] I just, I can't, I can't vote in favor of it. So thank you, Madam Mayor, and I yield, and I'm sorry
[3:37:55] to be as low as I was. I know that we're, we're listening to each one of us, and I appreciate
[3:38:02] you're attention in your respect and I I don't mean to belive. Thank you.
[3:38:08] Thank you, Councillor Ferry. Everyone who's wanted to speak on this issue of spoken, at least once.
[3:38:17] I'm going to just briefly speak and then go to Councillor Zeeam.
[3:38:21] You know, I'll say that I hear right colleagues on their various points of view.
[3:38:26] Oh, Councillor Simmons did you want to speak before I go? Okay. I hear you all
[3:38:32] on the various points of view. I think I won't repeat what so my colleagues have said. I'll
[3:38:38] just say that I think the amendments were an attempt to incorporate some of that feedback that we
[3:38:46] had heard. And this process started in the fall of 2021.
[3:38:52] And it, you know, if you look,
[3:38:55] There's 105 page community engagement summary about this process and exactly what was done,
[3:39:05] 105 pages.
[3:39:06] And so the assertion around this being rushed and this not having enough process.
[3:39:14] I think I come out a little differently than that.
[3:39:18] I think there are arguments that folks have made
[3:40:00] And I hear that. I think we are trying to be, we're trying to do a lot of things. And we have our 100% overlay. We have, we've, we're going, there's a lot of, further over, multi-family housing. And I know many of us are open to amendments. We're talking about social housing. So, I do think there's no lack of commitment from, most of this council on, many of these important things.
[3:40:30] And I think right now, before us is an attempt to say,
[3:40:34] look, we did hear that the process didn't recommend
[3:40:38] six stories and with some greater heights.
[3:40:42] And sure, there can be critiques of process.
[3:40:46] And I'm so open to that.
[3:40:47] I'm open to improving on a lot of different things.
[3:40:49] But I think on substance, I do think we
[3:40:52] are taking into account a number of things.
[3:40:55] And namely, also, the feedback from our business
[3:40:58] Association from others who at first were saying, you know, you should let this expire, you know, we don't like what happened here.
[3:41:06] And so I do think there are people who've come and said, we've come forward on this.
[3:41:13] And so I, you know, I did want to recognize that.
[3:41:15] So I wanted to just make that brief point.
[3:41:18] I'll go to a conversation.
[3:41:20] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[3:41:22] I just had a few remarks.
[3:41:24] I typically tend to keep my comments short, but I didn't want to just address some misconceptions.
[3:41:30] You know, my colleague, Councillor Flaherty said, you know, he supports a Webster part, but all the other changes, you know, are a bit too much.
[3:41:36] I would just say that, you know, in-minute staying at six, it's already at six. There is no change there.
[3:41:42] Cambridge Street is at six. It's staying at six. There's no change there.
[3:41:46] And the leech mirror parcel has already been permitted at six at a lower inclusionary. So there's functionally no change there.
[3:41:51] So, it is what the proposal of my fellow council are wanted, and that basically this is just a change to Webster.
[3:41:59] It was also concerned about it not being better right, but requiring special permit, congratulations.
[3:42:03] The Webster block requires a special permit.
[3:42:07] So, I think we should check off those boxes.
[3:42:09] The process has been going around until 2021.
[3:42:12] And I agree that a three year process or really four year process was way too long.
[3:42:16] Every term we have new counselors, if we want to make sure that all of our counselors are part of the entire process,
[3:42:21] which should make our processes shorter.
[3:42:24] I would say that there's been concerns about displacement,
[3:42:26] but also I would say that it's notable
[3:42:28] that the first buildings that were really proposed
[3:42:30] at a multi-family housing where you know
[3:42:32] the spirit's funeral home, the Harriet Jacobs house,
[3:42:34] buildings that had no residence living in there,
[3:42:36] because the place where the economics were best
[3:42:39] are places that aren't already residential.
[3:42:42] And so what we've seen has actually been
[3:42:44] a lot of development in places
[3:42:45] where we would want to see it.
[3:42:48] I would say that it was concerned that the study will come back
[3:42:50] and say that like inclusionary zoning needs to be adjusted. I would say the nexus is not based on the feasibility,
[3:42:56] the economic field is the ability of inclusionary zoning. It's based on diversity, which is inherently built in economic diversity.
[3:43:03] So, I think that that's just not how the nexus studies failed up on like what on how inclusionary zoning is built up.
[3:43:10] There was concerns about other communities on Cambridge doing way more than everyone else.
[3:43:15] Housing is a portion of the city,
[3:43:18] Everett, Revere, Boston, lots of other places
[3:43:20] have been building more housing per capita than we have.
[3:43:23] Just a few more short responses was,
[3:43:27] this is basically just a zoning for Webster at this point.
[3:43:31] And there's lots of great ideas.
[3:43:32] It is a housing emergency.
[3:43:33] And we can either take a stance of, like, yes,
[3:43:35] and we all have slightly different approaches.
[3:43:37] Some people really love the age.
[3:43:39] We'll a little bit more, some the multifamily,
[3:43:41] some other proposals.
[3:43:42] And then we're going to try to build each other up
[3:43:44] try to yes and approach with all different sorts of answers. Or we can break each other down.
[3:43:50] Like I have my issues with South Soil Housing. I think of it as a way of weakening the AHO and actually
[3:43:54] saying that we should pay more for 33% of affordable housing. I don't think the numbers make sense.
[3:43:59] But I understand that other colleagues want to. And I'm like, okay, let's explore. Let's try to
[3:44:02] prove the thing of it. But I see social housing as a way to, you know, actually make more market
[3:44:08] housing and less affordable housing at worst economic. So I don't really understand that. But like,
[3:44:13] we give each other the opportunity and grace to try to make our points.
[3:44:17] And I would just finally just end off by saying that I think that this is an approach that other places are
[3:44:21] visiting both the new mayor of New York and the new mayor of Seattle, Zorad and Kate Wilson are
[3:44:27] really looking at our examples and saying that this is the approach that we want to take between
[3:44:31] multifamily housing and Cambridge Street. I think that we've had a long enough discussion.
[3:44:35] I would just like to vote on the amendments, but I just wanted to address those points.
[3:44:40] Councillor Simmons, anything you'd like to say?
[3:44:47] Thank you, madam.
[3:44:48] I think it's all been said quite well and quite often.
[3:44:53] So if anything, I would like to move that Lee Vodam's.
[3:44:56] Thank you.
[3:44:56] I yield.
[3:44:57] And I will go to Councillor McGurkey.
[3:45:00] Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you. So the next order of business would be for the council to vote to amend the Cambridge Street zoning petition by substitution with the attached petition text revised map and revised map boundary descriptions put forward in the late order by the city manager. So that's on the amendments.
[3:45:29] So, would the motion, before us, Councilor Noon?
[3:45:34] Just to be clear, thank you through you, Mayor City,
[3:45:37] to ordinance chair of my govern.
[3:45:40] These, this would mean we'd be voting on the amendments proposed
[3:45:44] in the communication from other city officers,
[3:45:46] is that what we're, this vote.
[3:45:49] Okay.
[3:45:50] So the, just by the, just in case people haven't,
[3:45:52] so the, so the late city manager agenda item,
[3:45:57] talk what was in the communication filed by
[3:46:01] Mayor City, Game Concerned, all and put that into ordinance language.
[3:46:05] We would have vote on that so that that will be substituted into the
[3:46:09] Cambridge Street language, and then that will become the language that we
[3:46:14] eventually in a few minutes vote on as amended.
[3:46:20] That's no end, does that make sense?
[3:46:22] Yes, thank you for the clarification.
[3:46:24] Mayor, City, Kian, Chairman govern.
[3:46:28] So, per customer governance motion, we have to first vote on the amendments, and then the underlying
[3:46:36] petition.
[3:46:38] So, clerk, will you please call the roll on the amendments?
[3:46:44] So, we're calling the roll on the amendments by the late City Council agenda by the City
[3:46:50] Manager, correct, man, a mayor?
[3:46:52] Yes.
[3:46:52] Okay.
[3:46:53] Councilor Elzubi.
[3:46:55] Present.
[3:46:57] Vice Mayor Zeme.
[3:46:58] Yes.
[3:46:58] Yes, Council of Flaherty. No. No, Council of McGuvern. Yes. Yes, Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes.
[3:47:08] Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. No. No. Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes.
[3:47:18] Yes, yes, and you have six members recorded in the affirmative. Two members recorded in the negative and one recorded is present.
[3:47:39] So the next vote would be to vote the Cambridge Street zoning ordinance as amended.
[3:47:52] We'll go hand with that real call, seeing no hands.
[3:47:57] Councilor Alzubi. No. No. Vice-Mayor Zim. Yes. Yes. Councilor Flaherty. No. No. Councilor Luma-Govern. Yes. Yes.
[3:48:09] Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes.
[3:48:17] answers you see? No. No. Mayor Sadiki. Yes. Yes. And you have six members recorded in
[3:48:24] the affirmative and three recorded in the negative.
[3:48:29] The, the, we're almost there. We're almost there. Go ahead,
[3:48:33] come soon. We now need to vote. Um, the city manager, the late city manager at that agenda. I don't
[3:48:40] number 12, and communication and report from other city officers, it's number 2 to be placed on
[3:48:47] file.
[3:48:50] So we'll go ahead on that motion from Councillor Gouverne to place those two items on
[3:48:55] file.
[3:49:00] Councillor Alzubi.
[3:49:02] Yes.
[3:49:02] Yes.
[3:49:03] Vice-merzine.
[3:49:04] Yes.
[3:49:05] Yes.
[3:49:05] Councillor Flaherty.
[3:49:07] Yes.
[3:49:08] Yes.
[3:49:08] Councillor McGuvern.
[3:49:10] Yes.
[3:49:10] Yes.
[3:49:11] Councillor Nolan.
[3:49:13] Yes.
[3:49:13] Yes, Councillor Simmons. Yes. Yes.
[3:49:17] Councillor Sabrina Wailer. Yes. Yes.
[3:49:20] Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[3:49:22] Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes.
[3:49:23] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[3:49:27] So those are one more.
[3:49:29] One more. We have one more.
[3:49:30] And we'll go ahead and to Councillor Montgomery.
[3:49:33] Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you.
[3:49:35] I would like to move suspicion of the rules to move reconsideration,
[3:49:40] hoping the same will not prevail.
[3:49:43] So there's two going to be two votes here. So clerk, I'll lead you. You'll lead us through those votes.
[3:49:51] So the first is to move the suspension, Councilor Azubi.
[3:49:56] Can I do a point of order here and ask them, ask you all to explain what is.
[3:50:00] The expansion of the rules basically means that we are going out of order of the regular agenda of the meeting to bring something else forward.
[3:50:10] So, we're suspending the rules. So, by so council of a government can move reconsideration, which means if reconsideration is approved, then there will be no reconsideration allowable before the 12 o'clock Wednesday final.
[3:50:30] I don't know if I was very clear with that.
[3:50:32] Yeah, I'll just add that basically a motion to,
[3:50:36] if there's a motion to reconsider under Robert's rule,
[3:50:41] you can bring back something that was already voted on.
[3:50:45] voted on and that can be re-debated and possibly changed.
[3:50:49] And so we're saying that we want this matter to be closed.
[3:50:53] And so you wouldn't allow reconsideration
[3:50:55] so that would be a no vote.
[3:50:57] And historically, on various matters, we've done
[3:51:01] no votes on reconsideration, because we feel that the matter should be closed.
[3:51:07] And you have a certain amount of time to do the reconsideration.
[3:51:11] If I've missed anything, anyone feel free to add?
[3:51:15] I'm not sure.
[3:51:17] Yes.
[3:51:17] I'm sorry.
[3:51:18] I'm sorry.
[3:51:19] Thank you.
[3:51:20] Also, we consideration can only be done.
[3:51:23] But I want to make sure we're correct if you were on the prevailing side.
[3:51:27] Yeah. Yes. So, any further questions?
[3:51:34] Okay. So, who?
[3:51:36] Consulate, answer your question.
[3:51:39] Yes.
[3:51:39] My understanding is the first, first vote is on the suspension of the rules and the second
[3:51:43] vote is on the reconsideration.
[3:51:44] Yes.
[3:51:45] Okay. That's it.
[3:51:46] I have questions, clarifying questions.
[3:51:49] I'll go to Councillor.
[3:51:50] for Flair any of the concerns, is he?
[3:51:53] No, no, I'd consider Simmons answered my question.
[3:51:58] Under the point, I was going to make a point of
[3:52:01] parliamentary procedure to ask him to rub its rules
[3:52:05] that the only movement under a most
[3:52:12] reconsideration must be the prevailing party,
[3:52:15] not the agreeable party.
[3:52:16] So it's been answered, thank you.
[3:52:18] You've been studying cancer, where did I appreciate it all these days?
[3:52:21] Well, we'll go to a councillor, as I was saying.
[3:52:23] I just wanted to say, I was talking to a, like, a contributing lawyer who was saying that
[3:52:29] the councillor didn't use to ask for the suspension of rules and the inability to reconsider
[3:52:37] things.
[3:52:37] It's just something that we've been doing more recently.
[3:52:40] I mean, they're actually having more time to think about things,
[3:52:46] can sometimes be a good thing.
[3:52:48] So it doesn't seem like we should always be locking every vote into a final vote.
[3:52:56] And we'll have roles discussion this week.
[3:53:00] So feel free to bring that out there.
[3:53:03] Yes, I would say, Matt, I would say about America.
[3:53:05] This is something that we've been doing.
[3:53:08] is I got elected in this full committee 22 years ago. So I'm not sure who says who I gave that
[3:53:14] advice on that counselors as a result, but we have done this very very long to on important issues.
[3:53:19] This is not unusual. So now that we've had questions answered, clarified, we'll go back to the vote please.
[3:53:28] on suspension, counselor LZB. Yes. Yes, vice-marison. Yes. Yes, counsel authority. No. No,
[3:53:37] counsel Montgomery.
[3:53:41] Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Counselor Simmons. Yes. Counselor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes.
[3:53:50] Counselor Zucy. No. No. Mayor C. D. K. Yes. Yes. And you have seven members recorded in the affirmative
[3:53:56] and to record it in the negative.
[3:53:58] Suspension prevails. We'll go on to the reconsideration vote, please.
[3:54:02] On reconsideration.
[3:54:04] Councilor Alzubi.
[3:54:05] No.
[3:54:06] No, Vice-Mirazine.
[3:54:09] No, Councilor Flaherty.
[3:54:11] No.
[3:54:12] No, Councilor McGovern.
[3:54:14] No.
[3:54:15] No, Councilor Nolan.
[3:54:16] No.
[3:54:17] No, Councilor Simmons.
[3:54:20] No.
[3:54:20] No, Councilor Sabrina Wheeler.
[3:54:22] No.
[3:54:23] No, Councilor Zucy.
[3:54:24] Yes.
[3:54:25] Yes.
[3:54:26] Mayor Siddiqui. No. No, and you have one member recorded in the affirmative in eight recorded in the
[3:54:32] in the negative. Councillor Montgomery, was there anything else? I think we've wrapped up.
[3:55:00] Thank you everyone. Thank you for going through this at the Cambridge Street Petitions.
[3:55:05] It's only petition has been ordained as amended. We are now done with the city managers agenda. So, we will go ahead to policy orders, pressure of the city council. And I ask that you raise your hands.
[3:55:27] We'll go to council.
[3:55:28] Would you like to pull one and three counselor I'll do be pulls one and three counselors you see
[3:55:44] your mutate counselors.
[3:55:46] I apologize two and nine
[3:55:51] two and
[3:55:58] nine
[3:55:59] It's been pulled mayor city camp. Okay, so we've pulled 1, 2, 3 and 9 and so we'll go ahead and do a roll call.
[3:56:14] Consular as if you're not pulling number eight.
[3:56:19] No, but yeah, okay. So we'll do a roll call on adopting pulse orders 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.
[3:56:33] Counts, Laura, Zubi. Yes. Yes, Vice-Mayor Zim. Yes. Yes, Council of Flaherty. Yes. Yes, Council of McGovern.
[3:56:42] Yes, Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons. Yes.
[3:56:47] Yes, Councillor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative. The balance of the policy orders.
[3:57:00] The adopted will go to positive number one that the city manager asked the appropriate departments review the city's digital equity work to date, including the studies recommendations and all steps taken since the study inclusion in order to update the evaluation
[3:57:16] of existing internet access programs, assessing whether residents' digital needs are or could be provided for
[3:57:23] and to propose how we could better meet their needs and to report back to the council by June 20,
[3:57:28] 26 on internet access programs.
[3:57:31] This was filed by Councilor Zuzzi, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Serena Wheeler, and Vice Mayor Azim.
[3:57:36] This was pulled by Councillor Azubi, I'll go to the lead sponsor, Councillor Azuzzi, and
[3:57:41] And she yields to Casper, I am. Casper, does he?
[3:57:45] This is a policy order that we introduce less spring and with the same co-sponsors.
[3:57:54] But we forgot to ask for a report back.
[3:57:56] So we've resubmitted this policy order asking for a report back,
[3:58:02] because I realize at least that we may not have the 150 to 200 million estimated
[3:58:09] to invest in municipal broadband right now over the next five years, but it's absolutely essential
[3:58:18] that all of our residents have digital access. And I'm really happy for the $100,000 grant
[3:58:26] that we just received, the Cambridge Public Library just received, for their digital navigator program.
[3:58:33] But what I wanted and I guess what we wanted was a broader report back on what else is happening
[3:58:39] in Cambridge housing, in CHA properties and other, there are all these other programs that
[3:58:48] have existed over time, and we would like to update on the status of them because we
[3:58:53] want to make sure that everybody really has digital access with that. I yield.
[3:59:01] What are Councilor Zubby?
[3:59:03] Thank you Madam Mayor. I would like to exercise my charter right on this policy order to
[3:59:08] understand, to better understand it, especially as it can actually relates to municipal broadband.
[3:59:15] Councillor Osubi. Exercise is return rate and policy number one will move to
[3:59:19] policy number two. That the city manager is requested to work with a relevant city.
[3:59:25] Departments regarding incorporating plant-based solutions into the Sustainable Cambridge Initiative
[3:59:32] incorporating plant-based practices and city-operated events and using municipal communication
[3:59:39] channels to promote sustainable and affordable food and drink practices throughout the city.
[3:59:45] This was filed by Councillor Nolan, a Councillor Serena Wheeler, Councillor McGovern and myself.
[3:59:49] It was pulled by Councillor Susie, but I will go to Councillor Nolan as the lead sponsor,
[3:59:55] Councillor Nolan, unless you yield Councillor Nolan, you have the four.
[3:59:59] Thank you, Mayor.
[4:00:00] Thank you, Mayor Siddiqui, and I'll just make a few remarks related to this policy or to before
[4:00:05] yielding to Councillor Susie. As we heard in public comment, I want to thank all the folks
[4:00:10] from the plant-based treaty who came to public comment. I know they met with, I think, many
[4:00:15] city councilors, and they're really working to ensure that Cambridge is part of the leading edge
[4:00:20] of cities across the country and in fact the world that are looking into every single way that
[4:00:25] can address not only a mission in climate, but this is also gets at the heart of a lot of
[4:00:31] public health as well. So again, it also improves social justice, economic well-being.
[4:00:37] This whole policy order is about supporting Cambridge and reducing its consumption-based
[4:00:41] emissions and getting the word out to the public at large, about the importance of this for
[4:00:48] for that climate work, but also for public health. As some of the public comment noted,
[4:00:52] doesn't restrict anybody's individual choices. What it does do is what it would do if we move
[4:00:58] forward and it asks the city staff to really incorporate plant-based solutions not only into
[4:01:03] sustainable Cambridge but into everything that we do and incorporate purchasing practices across
[4:01:09] the city. Again, no one's diet has to change overnight but I would say everyone's diet can be
[4:01:14] improved. The emission pollution that is directly caused by all of our diets is something that we
[4:01:21] be prioritizing because it's something we control and also it's easy. And you can still have
[4:01:26] a lot of tasty things and still just reduce the emission pollution that comes with every single
[4:01:32] choice we make related to eating. So I would be really excited for the Council to pass this
[4:01:37] policy order to there's a lot of folks in the community, many of whom came to public comment
[4:01:42] who are willing to work with us on this. And again, this is really about setting the stage for
[4:01:47] to be a lead to join some of the leaders in the country and in the world who are working on this really, really important issue related to our public health goals as well as our climate reduction and emission pollution reduction goals.
[4:02:01] So I hope these more plant-based food choices is going to be a great way for residents also to work with each other and educate each other and help the city and therefore then the world as a role model move towards a more sustainable lifestyle.
[4:02:15] So that's my reason for bringing this for it and I'm really grateful I know there's there's several other
[4:02:22] counselors including Councilman Governor who'd worked with this a lot and he is a
[4:02:26] co-sponsor he might want to speak before we go to Councilor Zizzi who was a co-sponsor
[4:02:34] it was yeah any of the co-sponsors Councilman Governor I Councilman I don't see oh yeah
[4:02:41] your head is up go ahead thank you man I've been through you I just want to thank
[4:02:47] for putting this policy order together, I actually got a approach with this issue.
[4:02:53] Maybe a year and a half ago through the MSPCA,
[4:03:01] that was endorsing this work through some of their animal rights work,
[4:03:06] and then as Councillor Nolan said,
[4:03:08] we were approached again more recently by some of the other groups
[4:03:12] that wanted us to put this forward.
[4:03:14] I just, I want to thank Councilor Nolan for actually writing it and putting it together because
[4:03:19] I dropped the ball on it, but I appreciate her taking the lead and sponsoring this.
[4:03:28] And I think important point that she said is that, you know, this doesn't force anybody to, you know,
[4:03:33] to do anything.
[4:03:35] You know, but it is so that we have a greater awareness of this issue and can make some progress and do a better job with,
[4:03:43] with how the eating and environmental issues. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Are you all?
[4:03:49] Thank you. What about the councillors? Thank you. Through Madam Mayor, I just I wanted to
[4:03:54] think councillor Nolan. It also for initiating this. I also met with the plant based treaty people last
[4:04:01] fall and I was really impressed with their presentation and she councillor Nolan just speak me to
[4:04:08] drafting a policy order about it. I think it's great to get information out about this and for the
[4:04:15] city to model it. And I would like to be added as a co-sponsor for the policy order.
[4:04:23] Would anyone else like to be added as a co-sponsor? Would anyone do any folks have any questions or
[4:04:31] comments on this before we go ahead and ask Councillor, ask that Councillor Susie me added?
[4:04:39] So, on that motion, we'll do a roll call to add
[4:04:42] Councillor Zuzi to the policy order.
[4:04:45] Councillor Lzubi.
[4:04:46] Yes.
[4:04:47] Yes.
[4:04:47] Vice-merzine.
[4:04:48] Yes.
[4:04:49] Yes.
[4:04:50] Councillor Flaherty.
[4:05:00] Yes, Councillor Nolan? Yes. Yes, Councillor Simmons? Yes. Yes, Councillor Sabrina Wheeler? Yes. Yes, Councillor Susie? Yes. Yes, Mayor Sadiki? Yes. Yes.
[4:05:11] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[4:05:14] Also, number two, as amended is passed, we'll go to policy number three, that the city manager's requested to work with relevant city departments to prioritize pilot projects in 26 with that the use of a consultant or an extensive.
[4:05:30] pedestrianization study and in the medium term consider how additional pedestrianization is a long word.
[4:05:39] I was section of Rattles Street by restoring two-way traffic to JFK Street could enhance the square.
[4:05:48] This was filed by Councillor Nolan, Councillor Simmons, myself and Councillor Susie.
[4:05:52] This is pulled by Councillor Azubi.
[4:05:56] We'll go to Councillor Nolan and any of the co-sponsors to speak on that.
[4:06:00] Councillor Nolan and then Councillor Simmons.
[4:06:03] Thank you, Mayor Sediki.
[4:06:05] This policy order is about something that Councillor has been working on as I think is noted
[4:06:11] for many, many years.
[4:06:13] There's been lots of folks across the city who are interested in this and the Harvard
[4:06:18] business association as we heard in public comment wants us to move forward with some
[4:06:24] pilots and the whole idea is that we are all on record the Council's been on record in
[4:06:30] a number of ways of supporting more opportunities to pedestrian eye sections of the public
[4:06:34] way in order to in live in the community, help local businesses build community. We have worked as a
[4:06:41] group to pilot a number of pedestrianization opportunities. We can continue that work in
[4:06:45] The policy order really asked the city staff to prioritize these pilot opportunities pretty much immediately.
[4:06:52] We have several streets that are named in the policy order to move forward.
[4:06:56] And I think if we pass this, it really says to the city, we want these to happen as soon as possible.
[4:07:01] We also believe partly because the world has changed in the last few years in terms of availability of information and availability of data,
[4:07:10] particularly in transportation or traffic that we do not need a very expensive and time-consuming
[4:07:16] consultant study to move forward. I hope that the city will understand that we can move forward with
[4:07:22] some pilots but that also the dream for me is still to make sure that we take, we follow the example
[4:07:30] of leading cities in Europe and several in this country as well to use pedestrianization as a strategy
[4:07:36] for building community and helping small businesses, including that stretch of battle street, which
[4:07:41] is identified in earlier policy orders, which would require some re-direction of some
[4:07:49] of the other streets, but it's eminently feasible and does not require inexpensive lengthy study.
[4:07:54] So, I hope that we can move forward and have on-the-ground problems solved by joint and collaborative
[4:08:00] efforts of local property owners businesses in the council.
[4:08:05] Thank you, Councillor Nolan. We'll go to Councillor Simmons.
[4:08:10] Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me just stop by acknowledging Councillor Nolan for taking a lead
[4:08:14] on this policy order and for doing the work of hard work of keeping your focus practical
[4:08:19] and achievable, especially in tonight's in this tight budget environment. I also wanted to
[4:08:25] recognize Denise Jielson, whose long-standing advocacy for more welcoming people selected
[4:08:30] Harvard School has been a real spark behind this effort.
[4:08:34] This ought to be flexious of community conversation,
[4:08:36] careful walkthrough, shared interest, and testing ideas
[4:08:38] thoughtfully better than of a study in them.
[4:08:41] Size of Portland is the approach
[4:08:42] because it prioritizes real world pilots.
[4:08:46] Respects, fiscal constraints, and gives us
[4:08:48] an opportunity to learn quickly collaboratively
[4:08:51] and transparently.
[4:08:52] But what works of residence, businesses, and business
[4:08:54] is all I. So I hope our colleagues will see fit to support
[4:08:57] this, and with the obvious faculty,
[4:08:58] the flow back to you. Thank you, Councillor Simmons.
[4:09:03] Councillor, is this you did you want to speak?
[4:09:07] Okay, great. Now, we'll go to
[4:09:10] Councillor Azubi, who will this? Yeah, thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm okay with voting
[4:09:14] yes on this policy order and appreciate the work put into it. I do just want to
[4:09:19] quickly let some thoughts and questions that I have that I'll be curious about. I'm
[4:09:23] excited about the potential to betestrianize Harvard Square, but as someone who was
[4:09:28] I think JFK going to ways this likely dangerous, especially when you consider how heavy pedestrian traffic is in that area despite the fact that there is traffic moving there.
[4:09:39] I'm worried about the safety of pedestrian drivers, bikers and anyone else, and I'm looking forward to understanding the feedback on this report.
[4:09:46] Just a few questions on are we thinking outside of the box here as much as we can?
[4:09:50] Are we only going to consider one way forward toward pedestrianization or can we leave room for a range of options, but this just need more
[4:10:00] Our adjustments then what is on this policy order currently, is it simply enough to go back to
[4:10:05] two-way traffic? I have a lot of questions and we'll be curious as I do care about the pedestrianization
[4:10:10] of Harvard Square since it's such a busy area in our city. So I'll be checking out the report and
[4:10:15] would love to.
[4:10:18] Any other questions on the policy order before us?
[4:10:25] I don't see any. So we can go ahead and
[4:10:27] roll call on adopting Paul's your number three.
[4:10:31] Councilor L. Zubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-Mayor Zene. Yes.
[4:10:35] Yes. Council of Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Council of McGuvern.
[4:10:40] Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes.
[4:10:44] Yes. Councilor Simon. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes.
[4:10:49] Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Yes. Mayor Sediki. Yes.
[4:10:53] Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[4:10:56] policy order number three is adopted. We now are on to policy order number nine that the
[4:11:04] Mayor he arrived points the committee to screen applicants for the position of city clerk.
[4:11:08] This was filed by myself and Vice Mayor Azim and pulled by Councillor Azuzi before I go to
[4:11:13] Councillor Azuzi. I will ask for a motion by Councillor Azim to on suspension to bring forward
[4:11:22] communications from other city officers number four, which is a communication from me
[4:11:29] transmitting information about the search process for permanent city clerk so that we
[4:11:34] can have both of those together as we talk about the policy order and where things left off
[4:11:42] with the previous search. So on that motion we'll do a real call for suspension.
[4:11:48] Councillor Al-Zubi? Yes. Yes. Vice-Mayor Azine? Yes. Yes.
[4:11:53] Councillor Flaherty? Yes. Yes. Councillor Luma-Govern? Yes. Yes.
[4:11:59] Councillor Nolan? Yes. Yes. Councillor Simmons? Yes.
[4:12:03] Yes. Councillor Sabrina Wheeler? Yes.
[4:12:06] Yes. Councillor Zucy? Yes. Yes.
[4:12:08] Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[4:12:14] The communication and from other city officers and before
[4:12:17] is before us alongside this policy order and I'll just quickly briefly brief the
[4:12:26] half the communication kind of outlines the history of the city clerk search process
[4:12:33] and the fact that there was a process and I want to thank Councillor Simmons who has
[4:12:43] We're led that process and many of the several of the city councillors who were involved.
[4:12:50] And as was mentioned, you know, I think there was thought put into the fact that, well,
[4:12:59] there was a process that were folks who were evaluated for the position that we,
[4:13:07] the committee at the time was not ready to bring forward recommended finalists.
[4:13:12] Councillor Simmons, if you want to add anything, I'll yield to you.
[4:13:17] Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you for bringing this forward and restarting the process.
[4:13:21] As you had said, there was a committee convened.
[4:13:26] I want to thank and Naomi Steffen, who helped us by, we sent out the job description.
[4:13:33] We got a number of resumes, back those resumes were bedded.
[4:13:37] We sat down and looked over finalists, got those finalists down to another finalists, and at the end of that,
[4:13:44] although we came very close without saying too much, we did not feel confident that we should go
[4:13:51] forward with the final product. I'm trying to be vague on purpose.
[4:13:58] So, sorry, I guess you could say,
[4:14:00] tag your it. Madam Mayor, but it was, I do want to thank my colleagues for the worth they put in.
[4:14:05] It was well-run, it we did our best work but this is an important job and as an important
[4:14:13] job we wanted to make sure we got the best candidate and one of the candidates that we were
[4:14:18] very interested in dropped out at the end and did not want to say well let's take whose left
[4:14:24] let's restart.
[4:14:25] So thank you for that opportunity to explain that and I yield the floor.
[4:14:29] Thank you Councillor Simmons and I'll say to my colleagues, you know, being on the City Clerk
[4:14:35] Search Process is all the rage, and so please do,
[4:14:39] let me know if you're interested,
[4:14:41] because we do need you.
[4:14:43] We need you.
[4:15:00] I just wanted to thank Paula Creme for continuing to serve as our clerk. Yeah, when you had signed up for a six-month job, and I wanted to express interest in being on the committee, I think it's very important that we fill this position and soon, and I understand that summer bill is just about to hire a new clerk too.
[4:15:26] So I hope they haven't snatched the best candidate.
[4:15:30] So I think we need to get on it.
[4:15:33] And again, Paula, thank you so much for all of your service.
[4:15:38] But anyway, so I'm eager for us to advance and to find someone that can do the job.
[4:15:46] Thank you.
[4:15:48] Thank you.
[4:15:48] Thank you, Councillor Susanne.
[4:15:51] Look forward to hearing from others.
[4:15:52] Yes, Councillor.
[4:15:54] I'm happy to serve on the committee, Madam Mia, but I confess that, no matter how hot I work in it, we're not going to find anybody as talented and as experienced and as racist, gracious as Paul a crane. So maybe I shouldn't serve on the committee because I don't want to be blamed for hiring her replacement because she's irreplaceable.
[4:16:17] We appreciate your part. Thank you so much. Thank you.
[4:16:22] And I think the best gift to you would be to find someone. And so we will, we're on it.
[4:16:28] So on that on a counselor on a motion by Councillor Zousie to adopt this policy order.
[4:16:35] And then place communication at the from other city officers on file. We'll do a roll call.
[4:16:40] Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-Mairzine. Yes. Yes.
[4:16:45] Council of Plarity. Yes. Yes. Council of Montgomery. Yes. Yes.
[4:16:51] Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons.
[4:16:56] Yes.
[4:16:56] Sorry. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes.
[4:16:59] Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes.
[4:17:01] Mayor C. D. K. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[4:17:07] policy order number nine is adopted, and the city manager, the communications from other city
[4:17:15] officers is placed on file or done with policy orders, but we're not done with the calendar,
[4:17:24] so we'll move on to the calendar. There are two items on the calendar, so we'll go to the number one item,
[4:17:31] which is a communication transmitted from the on-wallung city manager relative to the final landmark
[4:17:37] designation report for the Nathaniel Sikney House at 45-month Auburn Street. This
[4:17:44] charter rate was exercised by Councilor Alzubi at our last Councilor meeting, January 12th,
[4:17:50] so I will go to Councilor Alzubi. Thank you Madam Mayor. So some context I exercised my charter
[4:17:57] right to better understand what was going on in the case of this landmarking decision.
[4:18:01] Tonight, I will be voting in favor of landmarking the Nathaniel Stichney House for two
[4:18:06] main reasons that I just wanted to note the first is recognizing the significance of the space
[4:18:11] within a historical district such as Harvard's and I believe that landmarking can assist with
[4:18:16] appreciating its significance historically, culturally and socially.
[4:18:20] I mean, we're talking about one of the most historical areas in the United States.
[4:18:23] The second is out of support for the organizations and people who made the Democracy Center what it was.
[4:18:29] My understanding is that there could have been significantly more intentionality placed into bringing community members and organizations into the conversation about next steps.
[4:18:38] It has been almost two years since this has started, granted probably more because it's not easy to take the step to close down and think about the future.
[4:18:47] And I know Ian is interested in doing that work and I believe him in good faith and because of that, I think this landmarking could help give us a chance to bring in more of that collaboration on the historic community pieces, all yield.
[4:19:02] We'll go to Conther, as Ian and then Councillor Serena Wheeler.
[4:19:07] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[4:19:09] I will not be voting in favor of this today.
[4:19:12] You know, first of all, I would say that Harvard's quiz already a conservation district is in large, ready and extensive process in place to make sure that buildings fit the character.
[4:19:21] And it's a conservation district that I strongly support.
[4:20:01] Vindictive, you know, rapport in that sense that like we all know that the real reason
[4:20:06] here is not because certain, suddenly people had a very different feeling about like the
[4:20:10] historical nature of the house, but rather because, you know, in order to do the renovations,
[4:20:16] people had to be moved out, but also like, you know, for a long time the democracy center
[4:20:20] was providing low income space as a benefit to the community and it's unfair. I think in my
[4:20:25] for them to be punished for doing that as a community service and also I think that it's
[4:20:30] abusing our historical process because this in no way will keep that use the same or anything
[4:20:35] else. It will just keep the building in the same way that those renovations can't happen because
[4:20:39] people are upset about the fact that you know people had to be moved but I will also say that like
[4:20:44] you know the owners of the property have indicated every desire to welcome people back in after
[4:20:50] everything is done and so and work with the community to help people
[4:20:54] going forward. So for all those reasons I don't think I can support this as a nation. Thank you.
[4:21:00] We're going to consider being a winner. Thanks so much through you. I spent a lot of time
[4:21:04] in this building at organizing meetings at campaign launches at South Bayesian Community
[4:21:09] Open mics and I was proud to be the lead sponsor of a policy order last term
[4:21:12] calling on the foundation for civic leadership to keep the democracy center open and
[4:21:17] listen to the community groups that were impacted and sit down and have more meetings with them
[4:21:20] and come to our resolution, we need more community gathering spaces like the one that served,
[4:21:26] we have some wonderful public libraries and meeting rooms and public buildings and Cambridge,
[4:21:31] but there's a real demand for more. This lane-marking petition by the historical commission
[4:21:35] unfortunately doesn't do anything to mandate that the foundation for civic leadership or any other
[4:21:41] entity that would be in this building actually use this building as a community gathering space
[4:21:45] If the historical commission had submitted a petition that did that, or if the still commission put forward a proposal for the city to purchase this building, I would vote for that in a heartbeat.
[4:21:56] But in reading through the report, it's pretty clear that it would only preserve specific architectural features of the building and not any protections for actual community use.
[4:22:05] The landmarking would still even allow for major changes to the building.
[4:22:08] There's a line directly from the prediction, quote,
[4:22:11] the proposed designation offers approval in principle for removal of the L and one strict
[4:22:16] brick addition, as well as relocation of the house to the corner of Duolf Street to accommodate
[4:22:21] new construction. The only thing the land provides landmark protection for our specific
[4:22:27] features and keeping the building roughly the same size, but even that could change.
[4:22:31] provide another layer of bureaucracy, but not any meaningful protections for the building itself that the Harvard Square historic district doesn't already provide.
[4:22:41] The importance of the building has been in its use as a community gathering space, not in the architectural features that are honestly pretty similar to hundreds of other buildings in Cambridge.
[4:22:50] If the landmark process did anything to actually guarantee its use as a community space, I would gladly vote for it.
[4:22:56] I think that's the situation also, you really underlines that we shouldn't have to rely on private entities like the Foundation Pacific Leadership to voluntarily provide affordable public meeting and gathering spaces for Cambridge residents.
[4:23:08] You know, the city of Cambridge as a public entity should be the one ensuring that we provide more of those spaces. I hope that's where we can continue to pursue this term. I go back.
[4:23:16] We will go to concert fairity.
[4:23:21] Thank you for supporting the landmark designation of this building.
[4:23:26] I know the building very well.
[4:23:28] So matter of fact, I visited the building many years ago before the democracy centre was in there.
[4:23:38] And I'm familiar with it's decay.
[4:23:41] And I would say I agree with Councillor Azim that this seems to me to be sort of an abuse
[4:23:52] of the historical process because this is a building that falls in the jurisdiction of the
[4:23:57] Harvard Square neighborhood conservation district and this is a further encombrance that
[4:24:04] I think erodes from the importance of the historical commission.
[4:24:09] Now, I fully appreciate the work that the historical commission does and Mr. Sullivan,
[4:24:16] at the historical commission, I think, is outstanding.
[4:24:20] But when I looked at this, I did a little research.
[4:24:23] I think, as a initial report, it was to recommend to decline the petition for the reasons
[4:24:31] in his original report.
[4:24:33] And I think I'm correct about that.
[4:24:34] So I will not be voting to designate this as a landmark because then it would be I think
[4:24:41] only the 44th building in the history of the city of Cambridge to be a landmark and
[4:24:47] this building does not fit that criteria might be.
[4:24:50] We'll go to the Constitutional Assembly.
[4:24:55] Point of information, can we bring Charlie Sullivan from the Historic?
[4:25:00] I apologize. He was on prior, and I don't see him in the Zoom at all now. We can try to get him a link.
[4:25:10] Yeah. I don't think we should be making a decision tonight without hearing from Charlie. And I mean, when I day would be to move this discussion to a neighborhood in long-term planning, committee meeting to better understand his arguments for why it should be landmarked.
[4:25:29] I mean, what I took from the report was that the building has significance for many different
[4:25:36] reasons, not only because of its association with the democracy center.
[4:25:41] It was really powerful to hear so many of our public presenters talk tonight about the important
[4:25:49] role that a democracy center has played in their lives and in the history of Cambridge and
[4:25:55] square. The history of Nathaniel Stickney as someone that was a lumber dealer and a warfoperator,
[4:26:04] but it sounds like it's really the rare wooden frame building that the historic commission union
[4:26:13] and emissary thought, you know, well, all these things they thought it was important, but they also,
[4:26:18] So,
[4:26:22] they were worried about the view shed and as I was walking up Mount Auburn Street from
[4:26:27] Harvard Square towards Central to City Hall, I was really aware, I think what Landmarking
[4:26:36] would allow is for there to be some review in the development of the property.
[4:26:41] And I guess I really would trust the historic commission in helping to facilitate that review.
[4:26:52] I would hate to have the Bell Tower, the view of the Bell Tower, which is one of those quintessential views blocked by the new buildings.
[4:27:00] So I just feel like so instead of it being as of right with this landmarking, there would be some review in the development of the site.
[4:27:08] that was one of the reasons that it seemed really important to do. I was impressed with the
[4:27:14] allowances that the historic commission had made in the development of the site. They said,
[4:27:20] you know, they could change the developer, can change the entrance. He can remove the side,
[4:27:25] addition. He can remove the back addition. He can even move the house. So I felt like there had been
[4:27:32] a lot of flexibility. And I also just wanted to say in talking to Charlie recently about how many
[4:27:39] historical properties have been evaluated for historic review. As of like two weeks ago,
[4:27:46] you know, 240 properties had been reviewed, but the historic commission is really trying to be really
[4:27:52] thoughtful about how many they consider historical because they don't want to get in the way of
[4:27:58] development. So they're only saying like that 60, 60 buildings, that's a quarter of 240 or historically
[4:28:07] significant. But they are saying this building is historically significant. They've been working with
[4:28:15] and Simon's of the foundation for civic leadership for years on it. It seems like they have a
[4:28:21] of a set of relationship. I was asking Charlie about, um, um,
[4:28:25] set counselor Nolan's point that it might add to the expense of the redevelopment of the site.
[4:28:31] And, you know, apparently, you know, this sort of commission doesn't have any control over the interior
[4:28:36] of the building, but only the exterior. But he, he said the interior had basically been gutted.
[4:28:43] Apologies, counselors, Lucy. Um, Mr. Sullivan has joined. Okay. Great. Uh, I yield to Mr. Sullivan.
[4:28:51] And I think it would be good to just go around to those who do want to speak on this so far I've heard.
[4:28:58] One counselor who is supportive, I guess two counselors who are supportive of designation, three who are not.
[4:29:08] Are there particular questions that others have that we can lay out for director Sullivan?
[4:29:18] Anyone who hasn't spoken on this or would do you like to hear from?
[4:29:25] Then you are like the director.
[4:29:28] Okay.
[4:29:29] All right, director Sullivan.
[4:29:30] Do you want to go through us with us?
[4:29:34] Thank you.
[4:29:40] Did you get the questions director Sullivan?
[4:29:43] Or did you hear what was said prior?
[4:29:51] I'll look at you.
[4:29:52] Can you hear us?
[4:29:55] Let me text him, sorry folks. Yeah, I don't think he can hear it.
[4:30:00] Got to love Zoom, right?
[4:30:06] Mayor, did you get my question though? So, it was about whether, if the historic commission was involved, whether it would really increase the cost of renovating the building, whether there was significant detail to increase the cost.
[4:30:24] And Dr. Selen, you're still, we can't hear you.
[4:30:30] Oh, no, we can see, but not here.
[4:30:32] Sorry, we can see you, we can't hear you.
[4:30:43] Charlie, if you can dial in on your phone,
[4:30:48] I'm about to email you the dial in instructions.
[4:31:01] We're just holding, we're materially.
[4:31:38] Sorry, I wasn't prepared to have the exact tonight.
[4:31:40] Sorry.
[4:31:42] You can, I don't know if there's other agenda.
[4:31:43] I know it was Charlie's right next door.
[4:31:45] You can also walk over and go into my office.
[4:31:48] What did you say?
[4:31:49] I was just saying I don't know. There's other agenda items. I think Charlie's right next door and could walk over to my office this quickly as we can figure this out.
[4:32:00] I did also send him the phone dial in.
[4:32:03] I want to say anything.
[4:32:05] Councillor Simmons, what did you say?
[4:32:08] I was going to say to be want to go to the next item and then come back to Charlie.
[4:32:12] Yeah, what we can do is we only have we don't ever have anything else in the calendar,
[4:32:17] but in the meantime, we can go to the right item, this one would try to write. Charlie, do you want
[4:32:25] to go to the city hall and I can meet you there?
[4:32:31] I don't think you can hear you. I'll call on you.
[4:32:34] So we'll go to charter item. That the city manager is requested to conduct a comprehensive review of
[4:32:41] existing safety and security measures at Cambridge City Hall, which shall include an assessment
[4:32:46] physical access controls, visitor screening practices, on-site security staffing, and training,
[4:32:52] emergency response, and evacuation protocols and the use of security technologies such as surveillance
[4:32:58] systems and alarm monitoring. Charterite was exercised by Councillor Simmons. Actually,
[4:33:06] yeah, it was Councillor Simmons, and then I know there was a discussion of amendment that does
[4:33:12] carry over. But Councillor Simmons, please go ahead. Thank you, man in there. I just want to
[4:33:18] start first of all by just a small housekeeping issue. Councillor McGurham had asked to be a
[4:33:24] co-sponsor but in the process of working on the policy order, we had a little technical problem
[4:33:29] when he was not added. So the first thing I'd like to do is to add that we amend the policy order
[4:33:35] by adding Councillor McGurham. We can do that now. I can go through my remarks and come back to what
[4:33:42] question. I think let's just go do that now, in case we'll do. We'll do a real call on
[4:33:50] Councillor Simmons motion to add Councillor McGovern. Councillor Elzuby. Yes. Yes. Vice-Mayor
[4:33:56] Resene. Yes. Yes. Councillor LaFlarity. Yes. Yes. Councillor McGovern. Yes. Yes. Councillor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councillor Simmons. Yes.
[4:34:08] Councillor Sabrina Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded
[4:34:16] in the affirmative. Councillor McEvers added. Councillor Simmons, please go ahead.
[4:34:22] Well, thank you. So I exercised my charter, right, because I knew there was a amendment that was
[4:34:28] added by my colleague. I'll do the answer being a Wheeler and I want that opportunity to talk
[4:34:35] who their amendment with them and we did have that opportunity.
[4:34:39] So I want to acknowledge and thank them for taking my call and having an opportunity to talk
[4:34:44] to them a little bit about the reason behind my policy order and they proposed the amendment.
[4:34:51] And so for me, I also want to be very clear to my colleagues at large about the policy order
[4:34:59] and what it is.
[4:35:00] This is not about turning city hall into a fortress. It's not about making this building inhospitable or unwelcoming.
[4:35:08] It's not about flooding city hall with police weapons or aggressive enforcement. City hall, as to be all green must remain open, accessible, and fundamentally democratic, and that is not negotiable.
[4:35:20] But what this is about is safety, plain and simple.
[4:35:25] We're asking for a serious professional review, not saying that I reconcelted, but I am
[4:35:31] looking for a serious professional review, where we stand today, not because something terrible
[4:35:37] is happening to you, but because you recognize that we live in a world, that we live in this
[4:35:45] world, and we have to be responsible to the people who work in the building and the
[4:35:50] gag. Right now, City Hall has very limited mechanisms to know who is entering the building,
[4:35:57] who remains inside it, or how to respond to a situation if it escalates quickly. Over
[4:36:03] the past two decades alone, we have had more than a few moments that were uncomfortable,
[4:36:09] close to something that may be happening worse. And the only reason those moments did not
[4:36:14] turn into tragedies is the lock. And luck is not a safety strategy. Across the country
[4:36:20] three municipal buildings like ours have been the sites of real violence, elected officials
[4:36:25] staff and members of the public have been killed inside spaces designated for civic participation.
[4:36:32] These are not hypothetical scenarios and they're not ancient history.
[4:36:37] The recent incident in Lawrence can, Lawrence Kansas, is a stark reminder that the risk
[4:36:43] remain very veal, and very current. None of us wants to be standing here after an incident,
[4:36:50] whether it happens in Cambridge or somewhere uncomfortable to close the home, being asked
[4:36:55] to, you know, why didn't you do more? Why didn't you do anything when you had a chance?
[4:37:00] So this policy order does not dictate solutions, it does not pre-approose surveillance systems,
[4:37:06] access controls or staffing models, and ask the city manager to do what we should expect any
[4:37:13] responsible administrative to do, take a comprehensive look at existing conditions, identify
[4:37:19] vulnerabilities, and come back to the council with some concrete, thoughtful recommendations,
[4:37:25] recommendations that would require council review and approval, think that's important to say,
[4:37:30] We're not asked to act blindly, we're asked to plan deliberately.
[4:37:36] Other municipalities have found ways to find the balance between openness with lay-up
[4:37:41] proportions of safety measures.
[4:37:43] KVTB capable of doing the same, and in a way that reflex our values, our scale, and our
[4:37:49] commitment to transparency.
[4:37:51] Taking safety seriously does not mean abandoning openness, it means protecting it.
[4:37:56] I hope my college will support this order not out of fear, but out of responsibility
[4:38:00] to our staff, to our constituents and to ourselves,
[4:38:06] so that we are not wishing that we had
[4:38:08] active sooner. I believe Ms. Stefan has a copy of a amendment that I made acknowledging
[4:38:15] my colleagues a concerns around this policy order. She can bring that up on the screen.
[4:38:22] I will be able to flow over for the discussion and I hope that you will favor me and my colleagues
[4:38:28] Thank you.
[4:38:30] Thank you.
[4:38:30] Thank you.
[4:38:30] Thank you.
[4:38:30] Thank you.
[4:38:30] Thank you.
[4:38:31] Thank you.
[4:38:44] Just to kind of piggyback on what Councillor Simmons said, you know, I, I think,
[4:38:51] I think that there is a way to balance
[4:38:55] increased safety without becoming a building that is inhospitable. I certainly do not want people to feel that way. I want people to feel welcome in city hall and I also understand that
[4:39:11] things can happen and things can happen here. You know the one thing that most of these communities that see some some type of
[4:39:23] I'll say, we never thought it could happen here.
[4:39:26] I can't believe this happened here, right?
[4:39:30] So to think that somehow Cambridge is somehow
[4:39:32] magically immune to something bad happening,
[4:39:36] I wish that were the case.
[4:39:38] It's not.
[4:39:40] And so I would like to get a report back from the manager
[4:39:43] with some ideas and some recommendations.
[4:39:45] I may not support all of those recommendations.
[4:39:47] I may not support any of those recommendations.
[4:39:49] If he comes back and says, we should have
[4:39:53] military personnel at every door i would not want that right but if he comes back and says we can put a panic button in each
[4:40:00] Office, so that if, you know, an employee, and let's remember, we also employ a lot of older folks in our building who may not feel as comfortable dealing with someone who is being threatening or being dangerous, or, you know, the button that they're desk that they can press to alert the police officers who's downstairs.
[4:40:19] You know, that's not going to hinder anyone from coming into City Hall, but it would add an extra level of safety for those folks should they find themselves alone in their office with someone who is
[4:40:31] You know threatening them. So there is a way to do this
[4:40:36] Without it without city hall becoming an inhospitable fortress. So I would like to hear those recommendations back from the city manager again
[4:40:45] make support some of them, not others, but let's get this report and get these things in front of
[4:40:51] us so that we can have a broader conversation about it. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I yield.
[4:40:56] Well, good. It comes to a fairity. Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you. I fully support
[4:41:03] what tons of Simmons has put forward. I'm in public buildings throughout this commonwealth every
[4:41:09] single day. I'm in court houses in very urban areas, very rural areas, federal, state,
[4:41:18] a pallet, district, pro-be courts, and there's a metal detector at the front door of every single
[4:41:25] one of them. It does not make the buildings inhospitable, but it elevates decorum, and it's a,
[4:41:32] it's a security measure that I think is necessary in public buildings because
[4:41:38] all of us, as members of the city council, whether we like it or not, in today's age, because
[4:41:48] of our function become a person who's potentially the target of someone,
[4:41:58] because of their
[4:41:59] disagreement or whatever it may be, so I think that it's incumbent on all of us and the entire
[4:42:07] staff in the building to have a thoughtful security plan present in the building in the event
[4:42:15] that there is some sort of an emergency that arises. So I fully support this policy out of
[4:42:21] thank you, I yield. Councillor Azim and then Councillor Nolan. Thank you. I was going to say
[4:42:28] the same thing when I first came into City Hall. I was very skeptical of measures like these,
[4:42:33] But over my time, I've seen both, you know, the Massachusetts State House and Boston City Hall have measures, and I feel like they're still equally welcoming.
[4:42:42] And in fact, I would say that it's more welcoming in some ways. It's nice to be in a space where you feel like automatically a little bit safer than you do outside.
[4:42:51] You know, there's a lot of different sorts of people that walk into Cambridge City Hall, not just residents of Cambridge, or like people who come here for public comment, but really anyone.
[4:43:00] And I think that it really just helps to have a little bit of confirmation of what do we do in terms of emergencies.
[4:43:07] I know that during my time in city hall, people have gotten in myself included letters from people with, you know, sometimes vague, sometimes less than vague threats.
[4:43:16] I still get emails from time to time with threats, especially after inauguration this time from white supremacist sorts of situations.
[4:43:25] And you really do worry like what happens at any particular moment.
[4:43:29] And it's not my intention of any way of making it less welcoming, but hopefully just, you know, a higher assumption of safety.
[4:43:36] And I would say like the small little caveat I would throw out there as well is like,
[4:43:40] oftentimes in these metal detectors, your badges are also thrown.
[4:43:43] And so I know there'll be a separate conversation about,
[4:43:46] I saw if there's in multiple buildings and things like that.
[4:43:48] And so we want to use for them to get their badge out of their pocket and have to put it through the detector.
[4:43:54] So for all those reasons, I'm happy to support.
[4:43:57] Councilor Nolan?
[4:44:00] Thank you, and through you, Mayor Sediki, to my colleagues, I can support this.
[4:44:05] I find myself with appreciative of Councilor Simmons for bringing this forward.
[4:44:10] It makes sense to have a review, and also, as Councilor McGuvern said, depending on what measures
[4:44:19] are suggested, I have no idea what I would support.
[4:44:23] But I am mixed on this, on the one hand, very much understand that we all need to be safe.
[4:45:00] In Salt Lake City, just a couple months ago for National League of Cities, I walked right into an incredibly beautiful state house, the capital of the state house, no security whatsoever.
[4:45:15] It was open to the public. It felt unbelievably welcoming. People were wondering, this is on a weekend yet. It wasn't even during the week. It just felt like, wow, this is the kind of welcoming city hall we should have.
[4:45:27] So I think what's going to be critically important is for us to not feel like a fortress
[4:45:31] whatever happens to obviously balance that safety with an approachable open city hall
[4:45:38] where people are not feeling that they don't belong and I know that is the intention here
[4:45:45] which is why I can support it and I also very much hope that we do everything we can to make
[4:45:51] that people throughout the city feel welcome and to city hall that and yet to address the
[4:45:57] the very real concern about safety makes sense to me. But again, there's plenty of places
[4:46:03] in this country that have managed to have safe environments and have not gone overboard with
[4:46:10] as scaring people and to feeling that they don't feel safe. So I very much look forward to the
[4:46:15] view of our current situation and appreciate the policy order
[4:46:19] who's intent is that.
[4:46:23] I have Councillor Azubi and then I'll go to our city manager and then
[4:46:27] to the amendment by Councillor Simmons.
[4:46:30] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[4:46:31] It might make sense that I go after because I will be proposing an
[4:46:35] amendment to what I believe is the amended policy order that Councillor
[4:46:41] Simmons is going to pull on the floor with Councillor's
[4:46:44] clarity in the government, if I understood that correctly.
[4:46:49] Councillor Simmons?
[4:46:51] Yes.
[4:46:53] Do you have the amendment?
[4:46:54] I don't know.
[4:46:55] I'm sorry.
[4:46:55] Naomi has it.
[4:46:57] Do you want to walk us through it?
[4:46:59] It's very short.
[4:47:00] It's at the very end and it says.
[4:47:04] I'm waiting for it.
[4:47:06] I'm subject to city council approval.
[4:47:08] If I understood and truly, I understood what my colleagues were saying.
[4:47:13] They want to be sure that nothing went through without the council approval, which, you know,
[4:47:19] and I've having had the benefit of being on the council for a long time.
[4:47:22] I know that we don't usually do things that quickly, but I wanted to, in the spirit of collaboration
[4:47:28] and cooperation and collegiality, I wanted to add this language to assure my colleagues that
[4:47:34] we would not be taking any actions on any proposed implementation without having it approved
[4:47:42] by the city council and it has two pathways directly to the council or if you go through any
[4:47:48] number of committees.
[4:47:49] I yield.
[4:47:51] So, we have this amendment before us discussion on the amendment.
[4:47:59] We will go to Councillor D.C.
[4:48:02] Yes.
[4:48:03] Councillor Nolan?
[4:48:06] I don't understand why there would be parentheses around it.
[4:48:10] I mean, it may seem minor, but it should just be subject to city council approval, right?
[4:48:18] It's just a way to stand out for us to see it.
[4:48:21] It's not how we would say subject to city council,
[4:48:25] wouldn't have parenthesis.
[4:48:27] This is just a way of emphasizing that we are making this change.
[4:48:30] In addition to it being read.
[4:48:32] I might have made it bold in this palace.
[4:48:35] But we didn't.
[4:48:39] Well, if I understand the intent,
[4:48:40] Councillor Simmons, we can take out the parentheses.
[4:48:44] Yes.
[4:48:44] Thank you.
[4:48:45] Got it.
[4:48:46] Okay.
[4:48:46] Because Councillor Nolan, that was your question?
[4:48:50] Yes.
[4:48:50] I mentioned hearing Councillor Azubis amendments because it very much assumes there will be an
[4:48:59] enhanced safety plan.
[4:49:01] And I think what we're all saying is there may be an enhanced safety recommendations for
[4:49:07] a plan and then it would be subject to City Council approval.
[4:49:09] so I support this amendment because I think it's very important that the city council
[4:49:13] be involved before anything happens.
[4:49:16] We'll go to Constell and Zubi and then I know the manager is on so if he wants to
[4:49:21] share anything that would be great. Go ahead Constell and Zubi.
[4:49:25] Yes, so I sent a ver and amended version to Councillor Simmons Flaherty and the governance
[4:49:33] proposed amended policy order. And I just want to preface this conversation first with
[4:49:39] saying that I really appreciate that they're bringing this to the table and I really do care
[4:50:00] They do raise an important concern, and I think I'm coming from a place of wanting to make sure that first, we have a better understanding of what is going on within City Hall, from a public safety perspective, before moving forward on the next steps.
[4:50:15] I mean, even in the conversation that we're having right now, we have people understanding
[4:50:18] it as possibly metal detectors and then Councilor Simmons raising this is not necessarily
[4:50:24] about that, which assumes certain things about the amended piece that Councilor Sabrina Wheeler
[4:50:31] and I are proposing in this conversation, so we're trying to be explicitly thoughtful about this
[4:50:36] because we care about our city staff and our residents as well. And I want to make sure by
[4:50:40] focusing on delivering a solid report on what we currently have.
[4:50:44] We can take the next step on exploring recommendations together.
[4:50:47] That's part of why I decreased the days with Councillor Sabrina Wheeler to, again,
[4:50:53] be thoughtful and proactive about that process.
[4:50:55] And I do think that a strong foundation of understanding what's going on and tying it all together
[4:51:02] with what we currently have on the amended policy order is going to harm the intentionality
[4:51:08] that goes into this process.
[4:51:11] So breaking it down, again, from my perspective,
[4:51:15] will actually help us bring more voices into the process
[4:51:17] that would make it more democratic,
[4:51:19] especially when this is a space that grounds
[4:51:21] the people and government engagement.
[4:51:23] So I'm looking forward to hearing more about what we're doing
[4:51:26] to keep City Hall safe and accessible to our residents,
[4:51:29] but that's just a little bit more about
[4:51:31] the thinking behind this specific amendment.
[4:51:39] Can we go to City Manager?
[4:51:47] Oh, thank you, Mayor Siddiqui.
[4:51:51] I appreciate the discussion, and I think this is actually a really important topic.
[4:51:55] And one that we may want to just approach very thoughtfully.
[4:52:01] Certainly, I think this is a challenge that a lot of organizations are facing in terms of how to be open, welcoming,
[4:52:09] and then real security concerns, especially as we see different incidents happen across the
[4:52:16] country.
[4:52:18] I think my thought would be first that I want to recognize some of the inherent challenges
[4:52:24] in the layout of City Hall, in particular, the front entrance is pretty significantly stepped
[4:52:31] up, and because of the American Disabilities Act and our desire to be accessible, we essentially
[4:52:39] operate two entrances to the public. One in the front that is accessible by staircase, and the
[4:52:45] back entrance is actually the one that you can use that's wheelchair accessible. And so I just
[4:52:53] want to acknowledge that one of the logistical challenges is that we are actually covering two entrances.
[4:53:01] I think the second is that it may be helpful for further engagement perhaps with a smaller group of
[4:53:09] just to be specific. I think from the policy order it feels like the intent of this is mostly
[4:53:16] thinking about security from the standpoint of specifically weapons. And I think that's probably
[4:53:22] a little bit different than potentially a broader sense of safety, but I think that may be just
[4:53:30] something for us to work out because the interventions may be a little bit different if we're thinking
[4:53:35] about gun violence versus a different kind of challenge.
[4:53:42] And I think that actually helps us better understand
[4:53:44] what kind of technology or security solutions would fit.
[4:53:50] I think the other, and so I think the second is just being clear,
[4:53:53] what is the problem that we're trying to solve?
[4:53:56] And the third would be to make sure that,
[4:53:58] especially as we are examining this,
[4:54:01] that we're also getting a sense from the council
[4:54:05] on what level of comfort we have with what amount of budget and that's actually probably
[4:54:09] a bit of a back and forth. I don't want to say like we need a policy or to specifically
[4:54:14] says like this much I think ultimately we're going to want to both understand what the problem
[4:54:18] is and then start doing some research and looking at you know what is the range of potential solutions
[4:54:24] but I just want to acknowledge that some of these potential solutions could be costly and they're
[4:54:31] of those people's solutions and training solutions and technical solutions.
[4:54:36] And certainly if you've been, I think in other city halls or I know there are many
[4:54:41] facilities within our city that have put in place very sophisticated tools, but are very
[4:54:48] expensive, which actually pertain really significant senses of openness, but some of those
[4:54:54] tools are actually pretty expensive.
[4:54:59] So, I think it was the...
[4:55:00] I think this is an important topic, but I want to just call out some expectations that this isn't going to be like the council says.
[4:55:10] Go and give us a perfect answer and then we disappear and within 30 days we come back and there's an answer and we can implement it.
[4:55:17] I think this is probably a longer conversation that will take more research and also more discussion to make sure remaining in the right place.
[4:55:26] I would go to, I have concerts the way we are, and they'll go to concerts and I'm going to
[4:55:31] Thanks, Vladimir.
[4:55:32] I'll try to re-brief you.
[4:55:33] I think I'm happy to support a concert.
[4:55:36] I'll zoom these amendments here.
[4:55:37] I think that's probably on this sort of thinking about public safety and what really
[4:55:42] keeps us safe.
[4:55:43] And I think that is ultimately people and community planning and communication.
[4:55:47] It's easy to spend money on sort of security and public safety solutions and
[4:55:52] but the real hard work is the dialogue and the planning of how do we keep each other safe.
[4:55:59] I think, I had a really good, had a good conversation with councilor Simmons and councilor
[4:56:05] LZB about this and one of the things I had said in that conversation was I think there's just, you know,
[4:56:09] some part of the, the challenge is just the complexities, the policy order process and what are we actually asking for?
[4:56:15] Are we asking for a report back? Are we asking for something to be implemented right away and reviewed and then report back?
[4:56:21] And that's part of the challenge is the impreciseness of this, but I think the amendments from Councillor Zubi do help it be a little more clear in terms of what we're getting for and you know how we really focus on community safety.
[4:56:33] I'll back.
[4:56:35] We'll go to Councillor Simmons.
[4:56:40] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[4:56:42] Two, three you to the city manager.
[4:56:44] You said, I don't know if this is talking about gun violence or if you said some other things I didn't, I didn't like them all down.
[4:56:50] It's talking about safety and it's brought us way and it's smallest way will it cost money?
[4:56:57] Maybe maybe not but I don't think you can put a price on people's life when it comes to keeping them safe because I don't think anyone wants to be happy in the position of saying
[4:57:08] I wish I would have could have would have if we had known and so again
[4:57:13] It's off it's saying to the administration
[4:57:17] Please look at this and hear some of some of the things that you may want to look at.
[4:57:23] I'd like for the City Manager through his administration to come back with some, have looked at at a topic.
[4:57:32] Given that give us some suggestions and then we work from there as opposed to,
[4:57:37] well, we're going to give you a report without saying,
[4:57:41] Well, this is something that I think you might want to try, and then there's the scale of something that's
[4:57:48] fairly benign, whatever that might be, to something that's more stringent. I, as my colleague
[4:57:54] Tell them a government said
[4:57:56] We don't know until we see what other some of the options are that we might want to take
[4:58:03] If we want to vote it or not, but I want to feel the work. It's a material. So we're in all do we expect to my colleagues
[4:58:10] about, well, let's leave it open and let's get back in 30 days.
[4:58:13] As the city manager says, it's not going to happen that quickly.
[4:58:17] If you wanted to be thoughtful, the city manager and the staff engage in all the people
[4:58:22] that are involved in public safety, because that doesn't quite include fire.
[4:58:28] To have an opportunity to say, we looked at it, we looked at the building, here are some
[4:58:34] issues that we see that could be tightened up. You might say, we think it's all fine. Nothing's
[4:58:40] going to happen here. We're all good. But if we don't allow this administration to at least look
[4:58:46] at our procedures and our protocols, I don't think we've ever done a safety drill, other than
[4:58:52] a fire drill, and this building. And so it's very broad and I think we should keep it bright
[4:58:58] and allow the administration to look at the issue, take the 90 days and if they need a little
[4:59:03] longer, they take a little longer, but they say we're looking at this, we're close to
[4:59:08] coming up with some information. We don't have it yet, we respectfully ask you for an extension,
[4:59:12] so that they can have the time to do it correctly. And then bring it back to the council,
[4:59:17] the council, can then, I think it should be a full council engagement piece, so that we're all
[4:59:23] at the table all the time to talk about this. And the last thing, you said, let me go back to
[5:00:00] And she might remember the name of them, but these folks came to agitate people and gotten to the law department and really rattled this young lady in the way they approached her and talked to her.
[5:00:15] They didn't have any guns or anything like that, but they were very menacing.
[5:00:19] And we want people to feel safe in the building.
[5:00:22] We guard this, a wide idea, whether they're employee,
[5:00:26] or they're here to pay them what a bill.
[5:00:28] So with that, I will yield a little bit.
[5:00:30] I have a constant, as I see.
[5:00:33] Just very quickly, I would support a security assessment.
[5:00:36] I think that's what we're asking for.
[5:00:38] I agree, maybe it'll take 90 days.
[5:00:41] So I would support, I think we should just keep it with,
[5:00:47] the Scouts or Simmons proposal adding the subject to City Council approval.
[5:00:54] And I agree with my colleagues, we want the, we want City Hall to be a welcoming place.
[5:01:00] And I almost wonder if this should be an executive session, and you know, I, I feel like we,
[5:01:05] we know what the bad guys to know about all our security measures, but I, I, I look forward
[5:01:12] hearing more from the city manager and I think there's some way to make sure we have, they're
[5:01:20] probably is a security protocol whole plan in place but it would be a comfort to know more about
[5:01:27] it. Thank you. I yield. I think we've heard from all city counselors, I think one thing to what I've heard
[5:01:39] is from a city manager, and long as that this has to be
[5:01:45] some back and forth here.
[5:01:50] And it's much better to have kind of guidelines around that piece of it.
[5:01:58] So I do think we can perhaps have a public sphere
[5:02:04] to public safety hearing. We could have an executive session. I think it could be permissible
[5:02:13] under the executive session purposes that do exist. So there are different avenues here.
[5:02:22] I think it's clear that we can do this. We could probably do think it's important to get on paper
[5:02:29] what our policies and procedures are. This frankly, there's been a lot of changes to City Hall.
[5:02:33] the last, you know, many years. And I'm not, I'm not actually sure at what everything is. And so
[5:02:40] I do think that's important to get, you know, on other record. And then I do think it is
[5:02:47] important for us to discuss, to give feedback, to, you know, it is subject to us. And so that is,
[5:02:55] you know, important point. I do see Councilor Alzulu, Councilor Zulu, did you want to say
[5:02:59] something before we go ahead on your amendment?
[5:03:02] Yeah, I just wanted to quickly know that, you know, I don't think this is about keeping
[5:03:07] it open and did.
[5:03:08] I actually think it's the opposite about keeping it focused and also democratic because
[5:03:13] the space isn't as this space is about all of us.
[5:03:17] I mean, we're hearing from the city manager that there would also be an expectation that
[5:03:20] it would take a good amount of time.
[5:03:23] And so if we move forward with this larger piece, again, it could bring in a lot of different
[5:03:28] pieces that make it harder to navigate the conversation.
[5:03:30] So this is more so about keeping it focused and making sure it's moving forward with the
[5:03:34] clarity that it deserves.
[5:03:36] And also it'll give the city manager part of what he's looking for and what he listed,
[5:03:40] which is, what are we trying to resolve here and if we're not taking those explicit steps,
[5:03:45] and that's where again, where the amendments coming from, because I share that level of care
[5:03:51] for making sure that we have the right public safety measures in place, oh, yield.
[5:03:57] So, we've heard from everyone we have to, we should move on so we do have to move first on, yes, on the, we have to work, yeah, we have to vote on consoles, we'll be the moment and then vote on.
[5:04:13] Right, so I will not be supporting consoles, we'll be the member by Joe Freishate with thoughtfulness.
[5:04:18] Okay, so we'll put that before us and it was to take out
[5:04:29] the, it's the red line at it's any questions, we can go proceed to the vote.
[5:04:38] Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-marazine? No. No. Councillor Flaherty. No. No. No. Councillor Luma-Govern. No. No. Councillor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councillor Simmons. No. No. No. Councillor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councillor Azuci.
[5:05:00] Present. Present. Vice-marison. Yes. Yes, council of clarity. Yes. Yes, council of Montgomery. Yes. Yes, councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes, councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes, councilor Sabrina Wheeler. No. No, councilor Susie. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have seven members recorded in the affirmative. One recorded in the negative and one recorded as present.
[5:05:30] The policy order as amended is passed so now we'll go back to
[5:05:37] The first charter rate
[5:05:39] We do have director Sullivan. We do. Yes
[5:05:43] Councilor Susie you had left out. You had left off with your a question
[5:05:49] Do you want to repeat that since it was three hours ago?
[5:05:54] Almost three hours ago
[5:05:56] No, I'm eager to hear from Charles Sullivan.
[5:06:00] I have the historic commission and to see what his thoughts are about why it would be important to landmark the building.
[5:06:07] Great, director.
[5:06:09] Okay.
[5:06:10] Thank you, Madam Mayor, and apologize and I appreciate your accommodation for the technical issues.
[5:06:17] So what the commission is trying to accomplish here is to recapture the authority over size and shape of additions and new construction.
[5:06:26] That was taken away from neighborhood conservation districts by the amendments of October 23.
[5:06:34] So the commission already has jurisdiction over this property.
[5:06:39] It could easily put a pause on future development by saying that,
[5:06:46] no, the additions and the L and the can't be removed in a house has to stay on its current location.
[5:06:52] and that would be basically the end of anything except
[5:06:57] a rehab of the person property.
[5:07:00] We heard very clearly working with the owner
[5:07:04] that he intended to re-develop the site.
[5:07:08] He hoped to re-develop the site.
[5:07:09] We recognized his wishes in that regard.
[5:07:14] And we came up with a designation that would create a
[5:07:19] possible site by allowing the house to be moved to face the Wall Street and then creating
[5:07:26] a space behind it that could accommodate a, as of right, building that could be, theoretically,
[5:07:35] up to 12 stories high. And we crafted the designation order to accommodate that, explicitly
[5:07:42] to accommodate new construction as permitted by the zoning in effect.
[5:07:48] And the reason we need to have the authority on resizing shape in this instance is the
[5:07:56] particular location of a potential tower adjacent to the tower of St. Paul's Church.
[5:08:03] And the sensitivity over all sensitivity of the location, which is subject to distant
[5:08:09] use all the way from JFK Street.
[5:08:13] So the actual design of that tower, which we had said we will allow, is critical.
[5:08:21] Size and shape of that tower is critical to do an appropriate construction on that site.
[5:08:29] So that's still long and short of it.
[5:08:32] We need that jurisdiction back, because we worked with Ian Simmons and his architect
[5:08:38] very imaginative architect who blocked out some high-rise alternatives that included some
[5:08:46] frankly grotesque projections and candle leaders that would have incorporated or encroached
[5:08:53] over that relocated the restored building, which we felt would be really inappropriate.
[5:09:00] I don't think Mr. Simmons or his architect were serious about that, but they are possibilities
[5:09:05] under the zoning, or it could be possibilities under the zoning.
[5:09:10] So the commission is willing to accept a high-rise building on that site.
[5:09:15] We're not trying to prevent it.
[5:09:17] We're just trying to be able to detail to shape its massing and shape its character,
[5:09:24] so that it best accommodates the surroundings, specifically the same Paul's tower.
[5:09:30] So, the other point I would make is that we're totally aware that the motives of some
[5:10:00] Motion is aware that life is complicated. This is an historic resource, an important historic resource and a potential development site that could be done well, could be done not so well.
[5:10:14] And so regardless of the motivations of some of the petitioners, the commissioner recognized that this is an important asset and a critical place in Harvard Square where its jurisdiction needed to be strengthened.
[5:10:27] And so I'll leave it at that, Madam Mayor, thank you very much.
[5:10:32] I have considered as is he.
[5:10:36] Through Madam Mayor, I just wanted to ask Charlie,
[5:10:40] Charlie, I had asked you, I know Councillor Nolan had been concerned about the cost of restoring the exterior of the
[5:10:57] and you had suggested that there isn't that much detailing that, so the question is, just the
[5:11:02] open question is, do you think this would increase the cost of building on the site dramatically,
[5:11:10] with the landmarking of the Sticney building increase the cost of the restoration of the Sticney
[5:11:17] House dramatically? Well, the Sticney House is basically a wood friend, my King's Century House,
[5:11:23] like thousands of houses in Cambridge, and it's had hard treatment. It's covered with
[5:11:29] sighting. It can be treated with a residential grade approach to construction. I don't think
[5:11:39] we're going to cost them significant amount more money, and certainly it's already in the
[5:11:53] work with the property owners, and most of what would be done in a restoration would probably
[5:11:59] be done without, without commission review would be done with staff review. If Mr. Simmons wants
[5:12:08] to redevelop the site, yeah, relocating the house that he might prefer to take to scrape the site
[5:12:15] and make it go away. Of course, that's an extra expense. But that's the nature of
[5:12:22] on property ownership and a
[5:12:24] constitution district or historic district,
[5:12:26] the public interest.
[5:12:28] Years ago, the City Council recognized
[5:12:29] that the public interest imposed certain costs
[5:12:32] on property owners and voted to implement
[5:12:39] districts with that recognition.
[5:12:41] So that's just to give them going forward.
[5:12:44] But the Commission has always tried to be part
[5:12:46] of the solution and not burden on property owners.
[5:12:49] And so I think our track record shows that we've helped property owners deliver projects that
[5:12:57] contribute to the characters, Cambridge and the significant money.
[5:13:02] Thank you so much, I yield.
[5:13:03] Councillor Noan.
[5:13:07] Thank you.
[5:13:09] Marcia Vicki and thank you, Councillor Susie, for inviting and having director Sullivan here.
[5:13:15] This is really hard because I support historical preservation and conservation.
[5:13:20] I respect the work of this director commission. I do want to address and I believe director
[5:13:26] Sullivan alluded to this or actually directly address it. On the question of some other reasons
[5:13:34] for why some people are wanted to landmark, which is not related to the historical commission.
[5:13:40] I just want to reaffirm what several I think has been known to some people. The owners did work
[5:13:47] with the community, and despite no requirement to do so
[5:13:50] had many meetings with the tenants in the building.
[5:13:54] And they do have amazing plans for a great community asset.
[5:13:58] And yes, for those people who came and spoke in public comment,
[5:14:01] I really appreciate it.
[5:14:02] I myself have been to a number of meetings there.
[5:14:05] They were very useful and really great space.
[5:14:10] And many important meetings in probably historic decisions
[5:14:14] are organizing took place in the building.
[5:14:16] But if every space that had important meetings, including political planning, or historically known people,
[5:14:22] where to be landmarked and practically every building in Cambridge can never be altered,
[5:14:26] because our city is the epicenter of so many different things.
[5:14:28] So I just want to acknowledge that of course it's hard to see a building that you've had important space in meetings and to be changed.
[5:14:36] And yet it does seem to not want this building to be developed by this incredible nonprofit to enhance the square.
[5:14:44] would really, we would be timing efforts by responsible owner to create a wonderful space.
[5:14:48] So that is really kind of the community, some of the folks who want land,
[5:14:52] marking just to preserve what they had.
[5:15:00] Report, which director Sullivan just talked about, goes on for different reasons and I really appreciate the ways that the building itself has been allowed to say we could, owners could move it, take off the L which doesn't make any sense to preserve historically.
[5:15:17] However, I agree with Councillor Flaherty that this building to me does not meet the criteria that I believe we should be using for landmarking.
[5:15:25] And has been noted by my points and counselors as you thank you for raising about cost
[5:15:30] is that any additional layer of oversight just raises the cost for any product.
[5:15:36] This still is a nonprofit wanting to develop nonprofit community asset space.
[5:15:41] There's already fairly significant preservation due to the neighborhood conservation
[5:15:44] district requirements.
[5:15:46] The allowed changes to the building are allowed.
[5:15:49] I mean the building site will be dramatically different.
[5:15:51] Why add additional challenges to the project?
[5:15:54] And as we've put more constraints on owners
[5:15:56] without clear historic rationale,
[5:15:58] ironically enough, it may lead to less preservation
[5:16:00] because if you do not have a highly resourced owner,
[5:16:03] they could just let the building completely deteriorate,
[5:16:06] which is what we saw in our scene some
[5:16:10] with the space over on the story street
[5:16:12] to Harriet's makeup house.
[5:16:14] You know, it could just fall into ruin.
[5:16:16] And if we don't allow for proper development,
[5:16:18] it's going to have further deteriorate,
[5:16:20] space is in seven movement forward.
[5:16:21] So I am still voting no on the landmarking, I hope this is not, I want to make sure that
[5:16:27] people understand, I really appreciate the report and the willingness of the Structural
[5:16:32] Commission to consider various changes and I expect them to continue, I know that this
[5:16:38] property in a few years will be a tremendous asset to the city and I'm for one and grateful
[5:16:43] that it's being developed because I think it's going to add tremendously to the civic institutions
[5:16:49] and the city and we'll all be the better off if they are allowed to develop it as soon as possible
[5:16:54] with as few restrictions as possible given the ones that are already on their
[5:16:57] fourth historical commission and their commitment to a really great asset in the city.
[5:17:03] I yield. Councillor McGovern.
[5:17:09] Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you.
[5:17:12] So just because we did hear a number of people talk about the meetings, the community meetings and
[5:17:20] organizations that have been part of the history of that building, which I too have been
[5:17:26] in the Catholic involvement in that building a million times for different reasons.
[5:17:31] But you know, just so make sure that folks know that whether this is landmark or not,
[5:17:36] or say landmarking this building has no influence whatsoever on what happens inside the building.
[5:17:43] So we heard some people say, we should landmark this because we want to preserve the democracy
[5:17:49] center and the meeting that that has nothing to do with landmarking the building.
[5:17:55] The landmarking of the building is what the physical outside structure of the building.
[5:17:59] So even landmarking this doesn't mean that it's going to go back to how it was used before.
[5:18:05] That comes from developing a relationship with the owner of the building and their mission,
[5:18:11] which is one to foster civic space.
[5:18:14] That is their mission, that's what they do.
[5:18:18] And so, landmarking is not going to protect that.
[5:18:25] I would also say, you know, I guess Mr. Sullivan,
[5:18:28] it's about a marathon for you to Mr. Sullivan,
[5:18:33] you know, you outlined a lot of things that, you know,
[5:18:35] why this building should be considered historic,
[5:18:38] I guess, and you maybe can't answer this,
[5:18:41] but, you know, the building's obviously been around for a very long time
[5:18:43] and no one has moved to landmark it before,
[5:18:49] which sort of makes, again, makes me wonder
[5:18:51] around the motivation for this, you know, and I'd like you, if you could talk a little
[5:18:57] bit more, because where I also am a little bit uncomfortable, was your opening statement
[5:19:03] tonight, where you said that basically this is a way for the historic commission to regain
[5:19:10] control over a rule change that the council made back in 2023.
[5:19:16] And I guess what worries me a little bit is that is this about this particular site?
[5:19:23] Or is this about the historical commission not being happy with that rule change and has found a way to work around that rule change?
[5:19:32] For you, Madam Mayor, this is about the particular site.
[5:19:37] I would be, it would be, it doesn't matter if you need to say the Commission was pleased
[5:19:41] about the rule change because size and shape is really critical to any kind of designer
[5:19:46] of you.
[5:19:47] But in this particular case, the possibility of a high-rise building shaped and such a way that
[5:19:54] it would not only block the views of, say, Paul's tower.
[5:19:58] Bye!
[5:20:00] In the first round of this discussion before we came in, where it came in. But someone had said that initially your position was not to landmark it, and then that position change, is that accurate? And then if so, why did it change?
[5:20:14] Well, they could, you know, could block almost any development on this site, just simply
[5:20:22] by its authority to regulate alterations or relocations of the building.
[5:20:27] When we started to get into it with the owner and his plans for redevelopment and
[5:20:35] new construction on the site, we thought it would be advantageous to the district and to
[5:20:40] building itself, if it were relocated, the face, the face east on dual street, that we can accommodate
[5:20:48] the owner's intention to develop on the site and on appropriate way. And so, yes, so then,
[5:20:56] you know, the commission did vote that, and we've worked positively constructively, I think,
[5:21:03] with with the owner without a mind.
[5:21:07] I mean, we could have just dug our heels in
[5:21:09] without this, the commission could dig its heels in and say no.
[5:21:13] And so on that basis, you know, initially, you know,
[5:21:17] I was skeptical of the petition, but as we got into it.
[5:21:24] Thank you.
[5:21:25] Thank you.
[5:21:26] Thank you, madam.
[5:21:26] Thank you, sir.
[5:21:28] And I do, you know,
[5:21:29] and I think Councillor Nolan mentioned this.
[5:21:31] that there was, you did allow for a lot of flexibility
[5:21:34] and a lot of things to happen with the site.
[5:21:36] So, clearly those conversations were very helpful
[5:21:38] and I do appreciate that.
[5:21:41] That will yield for now, Madam Mayor.
[5:21:42] Thank you.
[5:21:43] Councillor Simmons?
[5:21:46] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[5:21:47] I think my colleagues asked, and it has asked the questions
[5:21:51] that would have asked, I was on the fence from minute,
[5:21:56] but I don't, I think I'm going to stay with my original opinion
[5:22:02] that I would not vote to landmark the side elbow. I do hear and respect Mr. Sullivan in his work
[5:22:09] and I always enjoy any time he puts anything before the council. So it's just relaxing that I
[5:22:15] be two or three times over, but specific to the landmarking. I feel confident that it's going to be
[5:22:23] dealt with in a way that is going to preserve much of the integrity that is spoken about
[5:22:29] in too. So I will not be supporting it and I will be able to move forward. Thank you.
[5:22:35] Thank you, Councillor. And Councillor Ferry? You spoke on this. Yes, and through you, Madam Mayor. Miss
[5:22:42] Assolving, you do actual work. And I understand that the building, whether landmark or not, stays
[5:22:53] under the jurisdiction of the conservation district. Correct? Yes. That's correct through you.
[5:22:59] And so any, in my right it is a certificate of appropriateness that has to be issued
[5:23:06] or am I mistaken for, yes, through you, Madam Mayor, any exterior work that requires a building
[5:23:14] permit requires a certificate of appropriateness. Right. And obviously all the zoning is still in play,
[5:23:21] right? Yes. Okay. All right. Well, I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Thank you. So we've
[5:23:29] heard from all my colleagues and you know I am where I think the majority of the council is around
[5:23:36] not designating this as a landmark based on what's been said. So I think we should go ahead and take a
[5:23:44] on whether or not to approve the final landmark designation
[5:23:51] report for the Nathaniel Sydney House at 45 Mount
[5:23:55] Arbor Street. So we'll do a roll call.
[5:23:58] Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-marisine. No. No.
[5:24:03] Councillor Flaherty. No. No. No. Councillor Nolan. No.
[5:24:11] No, Councilor Simmons. No. No. No, Council Sabrina Wheeler. No. No, Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor Sediki. No. No. And you have two members recorded in the affirmative and seven recorded in the negative designation for the report fails. We have disposed of the charter items and the table items. We're moving to applications and petitions. There are three pleasure of the council.
[5:24:43] on a motion by council move to accept them to accept the applications and petitions adopt them.
[5:24:53] Yes on a motion by Councillor Nolan to adopt let's do a roll call please.
[5:24:58] Councillor Azubi. Yes.
[5:25:00] Yes, Vice Mayor Azine. Yes. Yes. Councilful Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Councilwoman Gavin. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes.
[5:25:12] Yes. Councilor Serena Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councilor Suzy.
[5:25:18] Yes. Yes. Yes. Mayor city gate. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative. The applications and petitions are adopted. We'll go to communications.
[5:25:29] Thanks.
[5:25:30] Thanks, I love you.
[5:25:31] Thank you.
[5:25:32] One more motion by Councillor Simmons to place them on fire.
[5:25:36] We'll do a roll call.
[5:25:38] Councillor Aousubee.
[5:25:40] Yes.
[5:25:40] Yes.
[5:25:40] Vice-merzine.
[5:25:42] Councillor Flaherty.
[5:25:44] Yes.
[5:25:45] Councillor McGavin.
[5:25:47] Yes.
[5:25:48] Councillor Nolan.
[5:25:49] Yes.
[5:25:50] Yes.
[5:25:50] Councillor Simmons.
[5:25:52] Yes.
[5:25:53] Yes.
[5:25:53] Councillor Sabrina Wheeler.
[5:25:55] Yes.
[5:25:56] Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:26:03] The communications are dropped in. Well, two resolutions. There are six pleasure of the city council.
[5:26:09] And chair. Yes. Councillor Simmons.
[5:26:12] One.
[5:26:13] One.
[5:26:15] Any others? Councillor 30.
[5:26:17] I pulled two.
[5:26:18] Number two.
[5:26:22] And then we can do a roll call on adopting the balance of the resolutions.
[5:26:28] is making the unanimous upon adoption on our motion by Councillor Simmons.
[5:26:34] Councillor Elzubi.
[5:26:35] Yes.
[5:26:36] Yes.
[5:26:36] Vice-merzine.
[5:26:38] Yes.
[5:26:38] Yes.
[5:26:38] Councillor Flaherty.
[5:26:40] Yes.
[5:26:40] Councillor Nolan.
[5:26:44] Yes.
[5:26:45] Yes.
[5:26:45] Councillor Simmons.
[5:26:47] Yes.
[5:26:48] Yes.
[5:26:48] Councillor Sabrina Wheeler.
[5:26:50] Yes.
[5:26:51] Yes.
[5:26:52] Yes.
[5:26:52] Mayor City.
[5:26:53] Yes.
[5:26:54] Yes.
[5:26:54] of nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:26:57] The balance of the resolutions are adopted.
[5:26:59] We'll go to number one, which is a resolution
[5:27:02] wishing down a low means of full recovery
[5:27:05] consequences.
[5:27:06] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[5:27:08] A couple of things relative to this particular resolution.
[5:27:13] I want to pull it in a men-by-substitution.
[5:27:17] Unfortunately, Mr Williams passed away Saturday at 8.29
[5:27:21] in with all his friends and family around him. It was a very, very sad moment I was able to visit him a few times before I was passing and so it was just very sad.
[5:27:33] So this is not appropriate this time. I do believe or at least I hope Mr. Stefan has an amended resolution to send to his family.
[5:27:46] In fact, his funeral will be this Friday and I can't have details for those that they want to know, but Mr. Fund, do you have the amendment?
[5:27:55] Yes, I do. Did you want to show an on-screen?
[5:27:59] You don't mind,
[5:28:04] please.
[5:28:04] So what we'll do is I'm do a roll call on the...
[5:28:09] By substitution.
[5:28:11] I don't know if my college's have it or not, but it basically is just not acknowledging his life.
[5:28:16] I think he knows how to do that. He has transitioned.
[5:28:21] Madam, Madam Mayor.
[5:28:23] Yes, Councilor Governor.
[5:28:26] Through you, the Councilor Simmons, would you also add me as a co-sponsor?
[5:28:31] Can we vote that, too?
[5:28:32] I knew the family very well as well.
[5:28:34] Absolutely.
[5:28:35] Absolutely. So I would move that.
[5:28:37] We add Councilor McGuven to the policy resolution.
[5:28:44] And because it's made union with the Pana D'Aption, each member will be listed as fully supporting this conversation.
[5:28:56] So the amendment is before us,
[5:29:03] and we can go ahead and adopt and do a roll call on the amendment.
[5:29:09] Councilor Elzubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-Mayor Zim. Yes. Yes. Councilor Flarity. Yes. May God have mercy in the soul.
[5:29:19] Councilor McGavin. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor Simmons. Yes. Yes.
[5:29:35] of nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:29:39] I'm sorry, near City Gate. I didn't even notice.
[5:29:45] Yes, I'm sorry. And thank you. Yes, I'm really through this very quickly and one of the things
[5:29:55] for me. Let's do it out. About Mr. Williams is he loved to-
[5:30:00] Special Square and was found finally regarded as the vice mayor of Central Square. And I don't see it. And I would just like to add that I someplace appropriately like, you know,
[5:30:27] think about shoe-horning founding members' lifelong contribution, A&B, the unofficial mayor,
[5:30:36] a vice mayor of Central Square, I would shoe-horne that any people would accept that without
[5:30:41] having me write it out. Thank you. Mr. Farnish here. So, Mr. Perfect, when it comes to this,
[5:30:50] Thank you, and vice versa.
[5:30:52] And vice versa.
[5:30:53] I'm so interested in it.
[5:30:55] Yes.
[5:30:56] So we can go ahead and maybe that is a friendly amendment.
[5:31:00] But we can add that and then also add
[5:31:06] Councillor McGuvern as the second co-sponsor
[5:31:10] and do a roll call.
[5:31:12] Councillor Azubi.
[5:31:14] Yes.
[5:31:15] Yes, vice versa.
[5:31:17] Yes.
[5:31:18] Yes.
[5:31:18] Council of Flaherty? Yes. Yes. Council of McGuvern? Yes. Yes. Council of Nolan? Yes. Yes.
[5:31:26] Council of Simmons? Yes. Yes. Council of Sabrina Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Council of
[5:31:32] Zucy? Yes. Yes. Mayor City Gate? Yes. Yes. And you have nine members
[5:31:36] recorded in the affirmative. My condolences as well to
[5:31:42] family and I know his daughter. So we'll, we'll miss him. So we'll go ahead and do a
[5:31:50] roll call on adopting the amended resolution. We just did that in there. I thought we added,
[5:32:01] we added, we did the amendment and then we added Mark, but we didn't do a red, we didn't do a
[5:32:12] Councillor McGovern is outed in the previous vote.
[5:32:15] That's fine.
[5:32:16] So on the amendment by substitution,
[5:32:19] Ian to add, Councillor McGovern.
[5:32:20] No, no, we did that.
[5:32:22] We did all that.
[5:32:23] But now we have to vote on the whole resolution.
[5:32:27] As I said, then we just added the Vice Chair line as well.
[5:32:31] Thank you.
[5:32:32] Thank you.
[5:32:33] Councillor Azubi.
[5:32:34] Yes.
[5:32:35] Yes.
[5:32:35] Vice-merzine?
[5:32:38] Yes.
[5:32:39] Yes.
[5:32:39] Councillor Flaherty?
[5:32:40] Yes.
[5:32:40] Yes, Councilwoman govern. Yes. Yes, Councilwoman Nolan. Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes.
[5:32:49] Council of Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes, Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor Simmons. I'm sorry. Mayor Sediki. Yes.
[5:32:57] I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. The resolution as amended was adopted. We're going on to resolution number two.
[5:33:10] condolences on the death of Renee, and Amara, this was filed by
[5:33:15] muscle clarity, because of where do you have that for?
[5:33:18] Yes, just very briefly, and I know some of my colleagues attended the
[5:33:23] celebration of life for Renee last week at the Charles Hotel.
[5:33:28] And I just wanted to mention that I was struck by her humanity and her generosity,
[5:33:35] there was several speakers that mentioned her impact on their lives and what a vibrant person
[5:33:44] she was beyond being such a talented person and then her husband Paul, you know, told stories
[5:33:54] about how she would, she was a master puzzler whenever there was a 4,000 piece puzzle, she would
[5:34:04] assemble it in the house and they had a laugh about that. But I was struck by just the tremendous
[5:34:12] love they have for one another and the impact she's had on so many different people and one of
[5:34:18] loss she is not just a Paul but to the city of Cambridge and just what a tremendous human being
[5:34:25] in generalment Paul is. He's an outstanding example to all of us and he's been a great friend
[5:34:32] and a wonderful proprietor of the Hong Kong restaurant and Harvard Square.
[5:34:39] And I just want to offer my condolences to him and to the entire family.
[5:34:46] It just excellent people.
[5:34:48] So thank you very much, Madam Mayor.
[5:34:50] I yield.
[5:34:51] I agreed.
[5:34:52] Thank you, Councillor Ferry.
[5:34:55] Any other comments?
[5:34:58] We'll go ahead and do it.
[5:35:00] roll call on adoption, making unanimous upon adoption.
[5:35:03] Councilor L. Zubi. Yes. Yes. Vice-marazine. Yes. Yes. Council of Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Council of McEvern. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Yes.
[5:35:15] Yes. Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes. Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor C. D. K. Yes. Yes.
[5:35:25] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:35:27] The resolutions are adopted. We're going to committee reports. There are four measure of the committee to be
[5:35:34] Council.
[5:35:36] It's set to committee reports and points on five on that motion from Councillor Simmons. We'll do a roll call.
[5:35:42] Council.
[5:35:43] Yes.
[5:35:44] Yes. Vice-marison.
[5:35:46] Yes.
[5:35:47] Yes. Council.
[5:35:47] Yes.
[5:35:48] Yes.
[5:35:49] Council.
[5:35:51] Yes.
[5:35:51] Council.
[5:35:52] Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons. Yes. Yes, Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes, Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes.
[5:36:02] Yes, Mayor Sediki. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative. The four committee committee reports are placed on file.
[5:36:10] There are no roundtable minutes. There are three remaining communications from other city officers.
[5:36:20] We've, well, no, there's two, only one, no, only two, so we can do a roll call on that on the balance.
[5:36:28] Play some file.
[5:36:31] I'm placing them on file from Pastor Nolan.
[5:36:34] Councillor Azubi.
[5:36:36] Yes.
[5:36:36] Yes.
[5:36:36] Vice-marison.
[5:36:37] Yes.
[5:36:37] Yes.
[5:36:38] Yes.
[5:36:42] Yes.
[5:36:43] Councillor Nolan.
[5:36:45] Yes.
[5:36:45] Yes.
[5:36:46] Yes.
[5:36:47] Yes.
[5:36:48] Yes.
[5:36:48] Councillor Sabrina Wheeler.
[5:36:50] Yes.
[5:36:50] Yes.
[5:36:51] Councillor Susie.
[5:36:52] Yes.
[5:36:53] Yes.
[5:36:53] Yes.
[5:36:54] Yes.
[5:36:54] And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:36:58] Those communications that are reports from other city officers are placed on fire.
[5:37:02] We remove on.
[5:37:04] Are there any late resolutions clerk?
[5:37:08] No.
[5:37:08] I do not have any late resolutions.
[5:37:10] I do have one late policy order.
[5:37:12] We have one late policy order, which requires a suspension of the rules.
[5:37:17] So, on to Spension, we'll do a little roll call,
[5:37:25] Councillor Azubi.
[5:37:26] Yes.
[5:37:27] Yes.
[5:37:27] Vice Mayor Azim.
[5:37:29] Yes.
[5:37:29] Yes.
[5:37:29] Yes.
[5:37:30] Yes.
[5:37:30] Yes.
[5:37:31] Yes.
[5:37:31] Yes.
[5:37:32] Yes.
[5:37:33] Yes.
[5:37:34] Yes.
[5:37:37] Councillor Azubi.
[5:37:45] Yes.
[5:37:45] Yes.
[5:37:45] Yes.
[5:37:46] Yes.
[5:37:47] record in the affirmative. We're in suspension so we can bring forward the late policy order
[5:37:53] Councillor Serena Wheelerney. Thanks for coming through you. This policy order asks the city manager
[5:37:59] direct staff to request that flags be lowered to half staff for one week in recognition of the
[5:38:07] horrific killings of people who are trying to exercise their first amendment rights by federal agents
[5:38:13] Minnesota or in some cases we're trying to protect other people. We had a number of residents
[5:38:18] came with residents. We talked about this over the past few days. I think it's a fitting
[5:38:23] way to honor the folks and really recognize what's a tragic moment in our country's history
[5:38:28] that we haven't seen for decades really. We reached out to the city staff and a lot of
[5:38:34] apartments after we started getting questions about this from residents and we clear that
[5:38:38] the city does have the authority to make flag lowering decisions on our own as a city even without
[5:38:44] the order from a governor and that it would be appropriate for us as a council to put
[5:38:48] an elite policy order tonight, directing the city manager to do so.
[5:38:52] I also just want to clear that this is not the only way we are thinking of responding to
[5:38:56] the actions of ice as a public and you know, it shouldn't be interpreted that way.
[5:39:00] It's something we can do, you know, immediately to respond to it.
[5:39:03] We are also, at least for myself, considering additional policy solutions that have been
[5:39:07] touch with city staff and legal advocates about, you know, the horrific act of policing, both out
[5:39:12] of response to them and how to be prepared and protect our residents. I'll defer to the
[5:39:17] thing that the co-sponsors want to speak on this and be all back.
[5:39:23] Any comments? Yes, Councillor McGuvern.
[5:39:29] Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you. I want to thank just Sabrina Wheeler and the other
[5:39:34] co-sponsors for putting this forward and just as the co-sponsors should bring in Wheeler
[5:39:40] have their other actions that a few of us are working on to really try to ensure safety
[5:39:47] in our own community, but also respect and support other cities that are currently seeing
[5:39:55] unsafe conditions on their streets.
[5:40:00] You know, I could certainly go on for quite a while on my feelings about ice and their tactics and the
[5:40:09] violence that they're causing. I will leave that for another time. But I do appreciate this and share
[5:40:17] in solidarity with the people of Minnesota and the families of the victims at the hands of this legalized
[5:40:25] militia by the President. Thank you.
[5:40:31] Thank you, Marcia Vicki. I appreciate this also. I had been also working on something and then was told there was already a late order in process. So I'd love to be added to this order and to recognize for some folks that may have concerns that how do we decide what to do this. Well, this is a time that we need to stand up very clearly and say these deaths are completely different.
[5:41:01] necessary for us to acknowledge that they are beyond the pale, and that we, as a city,
[5:41:09] can stand up and acknowledge just through this symbolic gesture, and yet we've done a lot
[5:41:13] of other work and what continue to do work to make sure that we are standing on the side of
[5:41:19] democracy and justice and against what too many elements of the federal government have become.
[5:41:28] So I appreciate this order and recognize that we are in very scary times.
[5:41:37] Thank you, Councillor Nolan.
[5:41:40] Well, certainly add you.
[5:41:42] I'll just go around to hear from others.
[5:41:45] Councillor Azim.
[5:41:47] I just wanted to thank all those monsters and especially Councillor Sabrina Wheeler for leading on this.
[5:41:53] I just wanted to be added as well.
[5:41:57] Does anyone else like to be added?
[5:42:02] We'll go ahead and just add a counselor,
[5:42:05] Nolan and Azim, and do a role call?
[5:42:09] Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azim. Yes. Yes. Council of Larry? Yes. Yes. Council of
[5:42:17] McGuvern? Yes. Yes. Council of Nolan?
[5:42:23] Council of Nolan? Oh, sorry. Yes. Yes. Council of Simmons? Yes. Yes.
[5:42:29] Council Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes, Councillor Zusie. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. And you have
[5:42:36] nine members recorded in the affirmative. Would anyone else like to be heard on this
[5:42:42] before we adopt? Hearing none, we'll go ahead and do a roll call on the policy order on a late
[5:42:49] policy order as amended. Councillor Azubi. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Council of
[5:42:59] Yes, Councilor Nolan. Yes. Yes, Councilor Simmons. Yes, Councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes, Councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes, Mayor City. Yes. Yes, and you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:43:15] The late policy order as amended is
[5:43:20] adopted, so we're done with the agenda. Any announcements? Yes, Mayor. Yes, thank you.
[5:43:27] Thank you. I just wanted to let people know the specifics for Donald William
[5:43:31] Skinroll. I was a beheld at Rogers funeral home 380 Cambridge Street in Cambridge
[5:43:36] on Friday. That's this Friday. The 30th of January from 4 to 8 p.m. There'll be a
[5:43:48] at church, 49th, 6th Street in Cambridge at 10 a.m. then people will be going to the cemetery,
[5:43:55] they will be a repasse at the American League in March, 442 at 3 going to boulevard in
[5:44:02] that's from 12 to 4. Thank you for sharing that information. Any other announcements from the body?
[5:44:11] you're not going to go ahead.
[5:44:15] Go ahead, Councillor.
[5:44:16] Quick reminder, the basketball game between the Cambridge police and the Cambridge
[5:44:22] Warriors, a special needs.
[5:44:25] A basketball team is this Saturday at the warm memorial.
[5:44:29] Five o'clock.
[5:44:32] Be there a be square.
[5:44:35] Thank you.
[5:44:36] Thank you.
[5:44:37] Thank you.
[5:44:39] Sorry.
[5:44:40] Don't see anyone else.
[5:44:41] Thank you.
[5:44:42] We'll go ahead on Councillor Simmons' motion to adjourn to a roll call.
[5:44:46] Councillor Elzubi.
[5:44:48] Yes.
[5:44:48] Yes.
[5:44:49] Vice-marism.
[5:44:50] Yes.
[5:44:51] Yes.
[5:44:51] Councillor Flaherty.
[5:44:52] Yes.
[5:44:53] Yes.
[5:44:57] Councillor Nolan.
[5:44:58] Yes.
[5:44:58] Yes.
[5:44:59] Yes.
[5:44:59] Councillor Simmons.
[5:45:01] Yes, councilor Sabrina Wheeler. Yes. Yes, councilor Zucy. Yes. Yes. Mayor CDG. Yes. Yes. And you have nine members recorded in the affirmative.
[5:45:11] Good night. Thank you everyone. Nice to meet you. You are only tomorrow. Yes. This and bye.