Regular City Council Meeting

A quorum of the City Council being present. I call tonight's June 8th regular meeting of the Cambridge City Council to order. The first order of business is a roll call of members present.

Councilor Al-Zubi. Present. Vice Mayor Azeem. present, Councilor Flaherty? Present. Present, Councilor McGovern? Absent. Absent, Councilor Nolan? absent. Councilor Simmons? Present. Present. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Present. Present. Councilor Zusy? Present. Present. Mayor Siddiqui?

Present.

Present. You have seven members recorded as present and two recorded as absent.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and pause for a moment of silence. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Per Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, adopted by the Massachusetts General Court and approved by the Governor, the City is authorized to use remote participation at meetings of the Cambridge City Council. in addition to having members of the council participate remotely we've set up zoom teleconference for public comment you can also view the meeting via the city's open meeting portal or on the city's cable channel 22. To speak during public comment, you must sign up at www.cambridgema.gov slash public comment.

You can also email written comments for the record to the city clerk at cityclerk at cambridgema.gov. We welcome your participation and you can sign up until 6 p.m. Please note that the City of Cambridge audio and video records this meeting and makes it available to the public for future viewing. In addition third parties may also be audio and video recording this meeting. Public comment may be made in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A, Section 20G, and City Council Rules 23D and 37. Once you've finished speaking, the next speaker will be called. Individuals are not permitted to allocate the remainder of their time to other speakers. I ask that you state your name and address for the record and the item on the agenda that you're speaking on. We have 132 speakers who have signed up. Each speaker will have one minute. We'll go proceed to public comment.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Our first speaker is Joseph Adeletta, followed by Suzanne Blier, then Sarah Guyarog. Joseph, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Joseph, if you can unmute yourself, please go ahead.

Yeah, hi, Joe Atleta, 68 Walker Street, in support of PO number five. I want to correct the record on the impact of Cambridge's multifamily housing ordinance in a clear rebuttal to the disinformation-filled opinion piece of the same name weeks ago. Rather than engage in discussion of the glaring problems with the current ordinance, the article distracts and deflects by nitpicking over the accuracy of marginally verifiable specifics. Ironically, the article then goes on to gaslight the reader as to the success of the inclusionary zoning component of the MFH while admittedly being unable to provide verifiable specifics. Most egregious is the definition of affordability and the contention that because more smaller units are built, they're somehow affordable. Yes, on an absolute basis, the 250-foot... 250 square foot micro studios being built on 9 Wyman Road will be quote unquote more affordable at $300,000 each. Some of you have rooms bigger than that. So yes, the MFH has been successful in sending you to your room.

This article concludes by saying that the discussions would be more difficult if misinformation is being circulated. Yes, indeed it will. I suggest you stop doing just that.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Suzanne Blier, followed by Sarah Guyarog. Suzanne. Suzanne has not joined us. We will go to Sarah Geyerog followed by Nora Allen-Wiles, then John Froyo. Sarah, one minute.

Just make sure the button's on.

How about now? There we go. Okay. Good afternoon, Mayor Siddiqui, Councilors, and members of the community. My name is Sarah Guyrog, and I'm the Executive Director of Transition House. I'm here in support of policy order number three. Transition House has existed in Cambridge for 50 years. We've been serving survivors of domestic violence. We were founded here, we're based here, and every day we help Cambridge residents find safety, housing, and support. Like many survivor-serving organizations across Massachusetts, we're losing significant funding due to federal cuts. These cuts do not reflect a reduction in need. Survivors still need emergency shelter, court advocacy, counseling, and safety planning, and that need continues to grow. When a Cantabrigian experiences domestic violence, they don't call Washington, they call us. What is at risk is not just one organization, but the network of local services that helps keep survivors safe,

House, and connected to their community. Cambridge has always stepped up to protect its most vulnerable residents, and I urge you to support policy order number three and explore pathways to sustain these essential services. The survivors we serve are your constituents, our neighbors, and members of this community. They deserve to know that Cambridge stands with them. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Nora Allen-Wiles. Nora, one minute.

Good evening, councillors, and thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm Nora Allen Wiles, Director of Finance and Operations at On the Rise, a nonprofit in Cambridge serving homeless women and gender diverse survivors located at 341 Broadway. I urge you to support policy order number three to stabilize critical victim services for Cambridge survivors. This is not a request for the city to permanently replace federal funding. Rather it is a response to a unique convergence of federal funding disruptions that threaten critical services and community infrastructure that Cambridge residents rely on. On the Rise and our peers here are facing the combined effects of the post-COVID funding cliff and significant shifts in federal priorities. resulting in substantial funding losses for fiscal year 2027 that will directly impact survivors access to high quality and meaningful services. From our perspective, this investment is about preserving critical community infrastructure for survivors.

Once programs are cut and experienced staff leave, rebuilding that capacity is far more expensive than stabilizing it today.

Your time has expired. Our next speaker, thank you, is John Froyo, followed by Hubert Murray, then Carolyn Alpert.

Good evening. My name is John Froyo. I am from De Novo. First of all, I want to thank the council for entertaining policy order number three. It really is, the city of Cambridge is really unique and for The city to be even considering something like that, to me it's amazing. But for those of you who don't know De Novo, we provide free legal and mental health services. Our legal services we provide For domestic violence victims in family law, we provide immigration legal services, housing services, as well as disability services. We also have a mental health component where we provide free mental health counseling for people who are uninsured or underinsured. Like our partners, Transition House, Bach, On The Rise, and MAPS, we're facing a severe funding crisis because we had some federal cuts and we're losing about $160,000. In real terms, this means that we'll be losing one attorney and a half of a social worker. This cut came as a shock to us.

We urge you to support that policy order because it will provide us with a one-year bridge.

Thank you, John. Your time has expired. For everyone whose time is running out, please email the remainder of your comments to citycouncil at cambridgema.gov and copy clerk at cambridgema.gov. Our next speaker is Hubert Murray, followed by Carolyn Alpert, then Liz Loya. Hubert? Hubert, you have the floor. Please go ahead. To the person at the mic, are you Hubert? No. No. All right. Huber has not joined us. We will go to Carolyn Alpert.

Thank you. I'm speaking in favor of PO5 and the Brown petition. Today, the city councilors were mailed a PDF containing signatures from over 2,500 Cambridge residents pleading for zoning amendments. You will recognize the voices of community leaders and longtime residents pleading for protection from this sudden, unrestrained onslaught of developers and financiers who are exploiting the permissiveness of the new zoning to carve up our neighborhoods for market rate condos as fast as they can. We've had it with the ABC-financed affordable housing sloganeering that is masking naked greed and destruction of our neighborhoods. Hardest hit are the already multi-family middle-class neighborhoods.

Long-time residents forced out of their homes, contractors answering to no one, stealing light, air, open space parking, and community infrastructure. Please act soon.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Liz Loya, followed by Carol Alexandrov, then Jaylen Bernard. Liz, please go ahead. You have one minute.

Thank you, councillors. My name is Liz Byron-Loya, 21 Field Street. I'm speaking in support of policy order number five and Brown citizen petition. Many people tonight will share information in support of amending the zoning. I am using my time to present a serious issue of public trust. According to publicly available records from the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance, Councilors McGovern and Simmons, receive more campaign funding from real estate, development, construction, and land use law interests than any other members of this council. Of the approximately $150,000 in recent contributions from the leading Cambridge development and land use firms, McGovern and Simmons have received 92% of the total share of contributions. No one else is close. These are not abstract donors. They are the same development,

law firms and builders who regularly appear before this council and who directly benefit from policies that make building and approvals faster. It's not appropriate. We are here for merit, not money.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Carol Alexandra, followed by Jaylen Bernard.

No sunshine, no setbacks, no green spaces, no parking, no thank you. Please amend your multi-family housing upzoning to a more humane policy that increases setbacks and sunshine, required green space, required parking while decreasing height to match abutters. As you can see with the many very statistically significant circulating petitions and web postings, the majority of Cambridge residents don't want this upzoning in its current form. So many parking spaces have already been taken away and at this rate only the very rich will be able to afford off-street parking while the rest of us have to fight for fewer and fewer spots. Please listen to actual Cambridge residents rather than trying to build for an unwanted frenzy of speculative density. We voted for you to listen to the will of Cambridge residents, not the interests of out-of-town developers or some imagined group of future residents.

Cambridge families are being driven out of Cambridge as who wants to raise a family in these rectangular boxes popping up everywhere.

Thank you. Your time has expired. Please email the remainder of your comments. Our next speaker is Jaylen Bernard, followed by Michael Yogman, then Liz Speakman. Jaylen, one minute. Please unmute yourself. You have the floor.

Hey, how is everyone doing? Thank you so much, Madam Mayor Siddiqui and the council for hearing me today. I'm calling in about charter right number one. I am calling in to request that you guys put this on hold and you ask the division to come back with clear policies on how Compost is going to be mandated throughout the city of Cambridge and what that looks like for reducing trash tonnage. And if there's fines, what would that look like on first offense, second offense, third offense, or subsequently the second year? are first year of offenses. And then I'm also calling in on the city managers and city managers agenda item number 11. I am in support of the turf field going in at Ahern Field. I believe that it will allow for more time for our youth to be on the field opposed to grass that you know with weather and inclement weather you cannot play on it. Thank you so much and I hope you guys have a great day.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Michael Yogman, followed by Liz Speakman, then Robert Binstock. Michael has not joined us. We will go to Liz Speakman.

Good evening. My name is Liz Speakman. I'm the executive director at the Boston Area Rape Crisis Center, and I really appreciate policy order 121. and I want to thank Mayor Siddiqui, Councilor McGovern, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler and Councilor Zuzi for co-sponsoring. I also want to in advance thank the other Councilors for voting yes. Boston Area Rape Crisis Center has been a staple in the Cambridge community for over 50 years, providing much needed resources for survivors of sexual assault. We will be facing an almost $500,000 cut starting July 1, which would mean staffing, which means critical services for our neighbors. So we appreciate the city's willingness to help try to supplement that while we figure out how we can cover those costs moving forward. And that we stand with our sister organizations, On the Rise, Transition House, MAPS, and De Novo. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Robert Binstock. Robert, you have the floor. You have one minute.

Bob Binstock, 157 Hamilton Street, policy order number five in the petition of Douglas Brown. Case study in multifamily housing and zoning, 174 Hamilton. Serviceable three-family bought for $3 million by a developer who could have rehabbed it as a four-family but will instead tear it down and build a much larger structure of three units selling for $10.5 million total. Why? Because four floors and minimal setbacks allows the developer to make much more money. So the average price of housing units on that block in our city goes up, not down. There's an epidemic of this across the city. I just received a notice of four demolitions by the same developer in a small area this month.

Why are we prioritizing demos of usable multifamily houses and huge developer profits over affordability, over existing tenants, over mature trees and green space, more sustainable construction, and the neighbors? Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Matt Kelly, followed by Mikael Estale, then Hedy Seibel. Matt?

Good evening, Council. I am Matt Kelly. I live at 13 Oakland Street in Inman Square. I, like many people here tonight, want to talk about the idea of turf at Ahern Field. I would ask the council to halt any plans to put turf on Ahern. This is not something that the public, and particularly the residents of East Cambridge, it's not something they want. That assumes that they even know that this issue is being raised and up for consideration. Most of us had no idea until very recently that this was, in fact, something that might happen. I understand the arguments that turf makes it better for soccer and athletic fields. I understand that when we didn't do that at Senate Park, we made a mess of Senate Park. That is more a lesson to be learned, not a decision never to be made again. My kids are on the same soccer teams that play. For the record, they don't want turf on Ahern either. We need more open space in Cambridge. We do not need artificial grass any more than I need artificial intelligence in my life. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Mikael Estale, followed by Hedy Seibel, then Karen Burchette. Mikael?

Good evening, my name is McKaylee Esdell. I'm the current chair of the board for Transition House and I'm here to speak in support of policy order three. I'm also a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and domestic violence, and I know firsthand the importance of the services provided by Transition House and our partner agencies, some of who have already spoken here tonight. After six years of abuse, my stepfather tried to smother my mom with a pillow. She survived, and the next day we fled to a shelter in a nearby town. I know, without a doubt, that this shelter saved my life. I survived, became a CPA, got a PhD, and I'm here today asking that we continue to provide other survivors with a chance for safety, stability, and healing, along with a chance for better life. This council is committed to providing citizens of Cambridge with these very things, and the services provided by Transition House do just that.

Please ensure that survivors don't lose access to support because of federal funding cuts beyond our control. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Hedy Seibel, followed by Karen Burchette, then Marilee Meyer. Hedy?

Hi, my name is Hedy Siebel. I live at 41 Stern Street. I support policy order number five and the Brown citizens petition. Sometimes a bold idea, however well-meaning, like the multi-family housing ordinance, miscarries. What's important for its success will not be the stubborn intensity of its vision, but rather its community support and the necessary details for thoughtful execution. Amendments to this ordinance are its critical details. Even Ezra Klein admits that he erred in this book abundance, learning since publishing that top-down policy doesn't enforce changes without authentic community buy-in. Cambridge is a beloved place. Building a dense and affordable city happens best with community support. I ask you all to stop the political fighting, the binary thinking and name calling, and solve the problem respectfully. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Karen Burchette, followed by Marilee Meyer, then Phyllis Simpkins. Karen, you have one minute, please go ahead. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can.

All right. My name is Karen Brushett from 51 Cushing Street. I urge you to vote in favor of Policy Order 5. to evaluate the proposed amendments for setbacks in green space. Some say we must choose between housing and climate resiliency. that we must endure the negative impacts of new development. I reject that either or mentality. We can and we must have both affordable housing and flood resiliency via smart zoning. The city is spending tens of millions to reduce combined sewer overflows. Thank you so much for joining us. laid in stormwater and sewage in at-risk areas like the Port and Alewife. We do not have to endure preventable disasters. Cambridge can build both the affordable housing we need and the flood resiliency our community deserves. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Marilee Meyer. Marilee? Marilee, if you can unmute yourself, you have one minute.

Hi, Marilee Meyer, Ken Dana Street. I support fixing multi-family zoning which seems to ignore among others seniors, low-income, blue-collar residents in favor of formulaic luxury developers and investors. Most of these projects don't trigger inclusionary The fact that renters are being displaced exacerbates the housing issue. Having realistic concerns does not eviscerate housing. Roof decks and balconies are not open space. Years ago, a development on Mass Ave was reconfigured to accommodate a significant copper beech tree, creating open space on the corner. use percentage instead of dimension to gauge house placement and save a tree. The Square for-profit warehouses We are getting our generic, solace, and exclusionary. A Mercedes is cheaper than a Bentley, but does that make the Mercedes affordable? Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Phyllis Simpkins, followed by Young Kim, then David Halperin.

Hi, I'm Phyllis Simpkins. I live at 249 Huron Avenue in support of policy order number five. Developers are tearing down homes across Cambridge and building luxury housing that focuses on profits. MFH needs Near me, 36 Hutchins and a two-family with a driveway will be a nine-unit, four-story condo building with balconies overhanging reduced setbacks and no parking. Nine Wyman, a single-family home, will be a six-story, 56-unit building with balconies overhanging rigid setbacks and no parking. Architect Dan Anderson for these D&D projects is also an associate member of the planning board. When asked at the Hutchinson Zoom about the balcony overhang, he replied, The balconies are two and a half feet of the five foot setback and that's allowed.

These projects have a butters. The balconies will be 30 inches. That's this, that's the length of my arm.

Thank you for your public comment.

Cambridge can do better.

Your time has expired. Thanks.

I just wanted to make an announcement. If you're standing, there is space in the Ackerman room to watch. We don't want... The door to be blocked so feel free to go in the Ackerman room and video is available there as well.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Young Kim, followed by David Halperin, then Siobhan McDonough. Young has not joined us. We will go to David Halperin. David, you have one minute. And for those waiting, we are at speaker number 21.

Good evening, David Halperin, 14 Valentine Street, Unit 3. I'm speaking in strong opposition to both policy order number five and the Brown petition. The policy order raises concerns about developers skirting affordable housing requirements while having provisions that will clearly make We need more housing. We can't We can't move backwards on our affordable housing goals. We can't hit our affordable housing goals with just the AHO. The Brown petition additionally will down zone the AHO. The multi-family zoning was a historic accomplishment for Cambridge. We should be proud of it. Please do not pare it back. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Siobhan McDonough, followed by Lawrence Adkins, then Debbie Shapiro. Siobhan?

My name is Siobhan McDonough. I live on Walden Street. I'm a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and UAW 2320. I'm here to speak in opposition to Policy Orders 2, 4, and 5. On Policy Order 2, One reason the council voted to remove ShotSpotter was that it led to over-policing of working class and oppressed communities. Now with ShotSpotter gone, some councilors want to send more cops there anyway. We know more policing doesn't make people safer. Take the money that would go towards paying those cops overtime and instead invest it in those communities directly. On policy order four, this is Councilor Flaherty trying to use his legal experience to take advantage of people who should know better. The council should really reject this anti-democratic legal gamesmanship. and on policy order five, we have a crisis of affordable housing in Cambridge. We need to do more to prevent displacement and to build permanently affordable housing These amendments don't do that. They're largely aesthetic changes that would allow fewer people to live here.

This is not a serious solution to the housing crisis. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Lawrence Adkins. Mr. Adkins, one minute.

Good evening, Lawrence Atkins, 45 Hay Street. I called it out last time, plain and simple, we still haven't had that town hall meeting for the policing to tell us anything. We're still at a point.

It's not on the agenda. Please refer to an item on the agenda.

Along with that, I also want to make a comment about the housing. We're not even trying to achieve it. We're passing the buck along that when they're $600,000 units, then they're going to be an over onslaught of wave of affordable housing. It's not going to come. We're making false promises on a science that there isn't a soul up here that can make a promise to it. Other than the distortment of Cambridge is sure to happen. I feel that the ICD is probably doing the best it can, but it doesn't have the personnel it needs to even be effective for all these units that you plan on putting out there. Respectfully, you need to change your path. And everybody, see these people at the voting booth. Because if you can't change it now, take them out and send them home.

Our next speaker is Debbie Shapiro followed by Jiajing Li, then Marilyn Frankenstein. Debbie, you have one minute.

Good evening. My name is Debbie Shapiro. I've lived 40 years on Broadway mid-Cambridge, here to support Policy Order 5. More housing without more parking makes no sense. Trace people, caregivers, older and disabled people can't do without cars. Families can't grocery shop or travel to their kids games without cars. 70% of Cambridge households have at least one car and people moving into these new units will have them too. My two-block area along Broadway between Ellery and Ellsworth Streets is ground zero for this coming crisis. Right now, six new projects, over 200 new units are in process or planned. That's at least 140 more cars in just two blocks at the same time that we're losing the majority of existing parking on Broadway to bike lanes. So, developers are off the hook for parking, bicyclists get more road space, and drivers are left to battle it out with their neighbors in a Hunger Games-type competition that leaves them feeling helpless and frustrated and angry. I respectfully urge you, counselors, to address this problem. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Jiajing Li. Then we will hear from Young Kim. Jiajing, one minute.

Good evening. Jiajing Li, Second Street. I'm speaking regarding CMA 2026-174. The World Cup is coming to our backyard with games at Gillette, and that is exciting. Even at the highest level of soccer, the standard is natural grass-based surfaces because surface quality matters for safety, performance, and players' bodies. So Cambridge should not reduce Ahern Field to more bookable hours. Bookable is not the same as saveable, safely playable. The report claims turf means more use, but it does not prove more safe playable use. All weather does not mean always playable. Recent turf cancellations show that, and the report's own heat plan is to modify or cancel activities. Do not accept this report as complete. Pause the survey's decision. require an independent grass versus turf comparison and real community engagement before moving forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we will hear from Young Kim, followed by Marilyn Frankenstein, then Michael Copicino. Young?

and David.

Young, are you ready?

One second, please.

Madam Mayor, we're going to go to Marilyn Frankenstein while we wait. You will come back to you. Next, we have Marilyn Frankenstein. Marilyn, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Marilyn Frankenstein, Cambridge resident. Speaking against the coup-like attempt to overturn democratically passed policy orders to stop ShotSpotter. This was preceded by an evidence-free op-ed in which Councilors Simmons and Flaherty state that the debate over ShotSpotter has elevated ideology over facts. In fact, most of the testimony of acoustic and civil liberties experts organized by the Black Response over the last two years cited evidence such as an analysis of Chicago crime data proving police responded Four minutes faster to the most serious 911 calls in the six months after Mayor Johnson scrapped ShotSpotter. And also, ShotSpotter wasted officers' time by sending them on wild goose chases.

On what evidence, other than the for-profit company's PR statement, do the counselors base their claims that ShotSpotter's listening device is effective and does not track individuals or share information with ICE?

Thank you, Marilyn. Our next speaker is Young Kim, followed by Michael Copicino, then Anne Fleck Henderson. Young, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Young Kim, 17 Norris Street. I am truly lost as to how we got here with the multifamily housing ordinance. After two joint housing NLTP meetings, There was no agreed upon path forward. Yet tonight, we have both PR number five and the Brown petition before us, while CDD is apparently still preparing Material for June 25th joint meeting. The Brown petition is a useful starting point, but I believe we are mixing together three separate issues. Dimensional standards, parking policy, and community engagement procedures. More importantly, MFH is no longer the only S of Right residential development pathway. We now have MFH, AHO, Mass Avenue, and Cambridge Street.

before making piecemeal amendment to any one ordinance, the council should examine the larger framework governing all four pathways.

Thank you, Young. Your time has expired. Please email the remainder of your comments. Our next speaker is Michael Copicino, followed by Anne Fleck-Henderson, then Robert Loebacher. Mike, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Dear Council, Dear Council, I'm Mike Copesino from West Cambridge. I'm here to speak against policy order number five and the recommendations of the Brown petition. Cambridge's current housing crisis is here because of simple math. There are far more people who want to live here than there are homes. I'm a teacher and I bought in this neighborhood eight years ago. And well before the zoning law, I saw this neighborhood become somewhere that families like me could no longer afford to live because there simply aren't enough homes here. I want my city to be a place where people like me who've chosen to make their lives in public service and earn middle-class salaries a place where people can rent, own, and thrive. I fear that any adjustment to height, setback, and design requirements, community engagement, is going to slow down the process of building new homes. Any recommendations that need to be made, I really want to be deeply, deeply thoughtful. And I think these two amendments do not achieve that.

If people are worried about developer profits, I'd recommend them to Councilman Zubi.

Thank you for your public comment.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Anne Fleck Henderson, followed by Robert Loebacher, then Adriana Levitt.

My name is Anne Flack-Henderson. I live at 113 Richdale Avenue. I'm here to speak in support of public order number three. I will refer mostly to Transition House, which is the one of the affected agencies I know best. The cuts to the funding for the Mass Office of Victims Assistance are sufficiently drastic Thanks to our federal government that the loss to Transition House would require cutting staff. There are no expendable or unnecessary staff at Transition House. and new staff cannot replace those lost. If transition houses services or those of on the rise and the other affected agencies are compromised, Cambridge will take the cost elsewhere. Children witnessing violence at home may need special services in school.

Unhoused women unable to find refuge during the day will be sitting against buildings in the squares or begging for food. Survivors may be sleeping on sidewalks.

Thank you, Anne. Your time has expired. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Robert Laubacher, followed by Adriana Levitt, then Jana Odette. Robert, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, I'm Rob Lawbacher, 47 Vaseline, commenting on Policy Order 5. I'm a research scientist at MIT, and this weekend I reviewed the Most highly cited academic work on the impact of upzoning. This research shows that upzoning sometimes increases housing supply, but sometimes not. And notably, Those prices went up after upzoning. And in many cases, low-income residents left and higher-income people moved in. In other words, it increases gentrification. The goal had been to make for greater access for those with modest incomes. The result was the opposite. I laud the recent Cambridge Today editorial on social housing. written by Mayor Siddiqui and Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler and Al-Zubi. This seems a promising path. I'd urge the council to pause upzoning and work with the legislature on social housing. Thanks.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Adriana Levitt followed by Jenna Odette. I do not see Adriana Levitt in the Zoom. We will go to Jana Odette, followed by Carrie Saunders, then Walter Lewin. We are at speaker number 31.

Hi, my name is Jana Odette. Thank you very much for listening tonight, and I'm at 176 Large Road. I didn't actually prepare, but, I mean, I did prepare, but I didn't have a set... but I like what Liz Loya did in that she was very focused rather than on the policy order five, which I support, but rather on the real estate developers and who they gave money to and so forth. And my question is a question of transparency. I don't know where Doug Brown got the zoning amendments to promote sensible neighborhood development. but I am a trained researcher and I could not find except for the 400 plus page packet which included Doug's amendment petition.

Anyway, so next time I will prepare. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Carrie Saunders. Carrie, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you. I'm Carrie Saunders of 9 Ellery Square, and I'm speaking in favor of policy order number five. I support this policy order, which reflects that the one size fits all approach of our current multifamily zoning does not work. I live next to a wildly out of scale proposal that would put a six story, 60 to 70 foot tall building on a 30 to 35 foot wide street. All of the abutters in nearby homes are two to three stories with a few four-story townhouses. The building would loom over everything around it, including the street with an unbroken facade running 75 feet. set back 10 feet from the sidewalk. This is a main corridor sized building being shoehorned into a small side street and it is in the wrong place. Flexible setbacks acknowledge that different sites can handle buildings differently. Maybe you can keep a tree or have a driveway on one side if you can go narrower on the other side. Our neighboring project counts a roof deck with a capacity of 50 people as a large part of its open space.

They have sucked up the space from the ground where it currently benefits everyone to put it Thank you, Carrie.

Please email the remainder of your comment. Our next speaker is Walter Lewin, followed by Carolyn Fuller. Walter Lewin has not joined. We will go to Carolyn Fuller. Carolyn, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Carolyn Fuller, 12 Douglas Street, and I'm here tonight once again to speak in support of housing. And honestly, I don't know why I'm here. I want to be doing other things. We've had election after election that has clearly stated that Cambridge voters want more homes. And I feel like there's this minority that keep trying to shove Thank you.

Our next speaker is Mark Keebler, followed by James Zald and Bill McIverney. Mark has not joined. We will go to James Zoll. James, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor. One minute.

Thank you, Mrs. James. All 203 Pemberton Street. And I join with many others here tonight in strong opposition to the Zusy-Flaherty PO and the Brown petition, both of which will undermine the widely recognized progress that Cambridge has made in reducing the painful consequences of our housing shortage. The most appalling and unjustifiable effects of these reactionary proposals would be to move our city backward, away from fairness and equity and toward the exclusion and segregation that's still way heavily here. There's no question that the results of these policies being requested tonight, there's no question about it, similar policies have been in place for decades. They've been beneficial to the few among us who can pay several millions of dollars for a place to live, but the majority cannot.

There's more to housing than convenient access to free parking and ensuring that the appearance of housing meets the approval of other people.

Thank you. Please email the remainder of your comments. We will hear next from Bill McEvaney, followed by Louise Venden, then Ann Tennis. Bill, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Bill McIverney, 12 Douglas Street. I'm speaking in opposition to PO number five and the Brown petition. Dear mayor and councilors, A community that doesn't defend its children from exile is a dying community. That's not Cambridge. We've stepped up to make it possible for our children and neighbors to stay here with our new zoning. We've seen the unintended consequences of our old exclusionary zoning. Way too many buildings converted from affordable to luxury units with no new units added. The result, massive displacement. Why? One, the number of homes determines how many people can live here. Two, Cambridge has no undesirable neighborhoods. Three, as long as we live in a capitalist system, resources like housing go to the richest person who wants them. The best way we have of slowing displacement is building housing that is more attractive to the rich than our existing occupied housing. Please vote against all attempts to reduce the effectiveness of our new zoning.

Don't weaken these protections against displacement before we've even seen how well they work. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Louise Venden. Louise has not joined us. We will go to Ann Tennis. Ann, you have the floor. You have one minute. Please go ahead.

and Tennis 71 Griswold Street regarding policy number five. The residents of Cambridge have spent much of their lives working to make this city a wonderful place to live. And we understand that there is a need for affordable housing. but what we do not believe is there's a need to bastardize existing neighborhoods in order to build affordable housing. No frontage, no backyards, towering units over existing homes, no parking, no green space, No place for residents to interact. Developers are knocking on doors and calling owners from across the city asking them to sell. They want in. They want to use the zoning you put through to make their money. The Council has opened the door for developers to ruin neighborhoods, and the residents of Cambridge have spoken over the past three years. The one thing that we're realizing is that the Council thinks that they know best. Remember, this Council represents the people. We want the council to take the Zusy-Flaherty policy order and the Brown petition, read it, work together, and come back to us with something that the residents can support.

Thank you.

Thank you. We're going to go back to two people that we skipped earlier. Suzanne Blier. Suzanne, you have the floor. You have one minute. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Thank you so much also for calling on me. Ann Tennis really said everything that can be said. This is a really modest proposal, and it's time to really rethink this around critical issues. of Space and Cost and how to make this into the best that it could possibly be even modestly. What we're seeing is a lot of construction that is building Thank you for joining us. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for watching. Every time you force out tenants from existing homes, they have to find a new place which is more expensive.

This is way too expensive. It's not doing what we want it to do. We need more Housing Affordability, and please work together to bring together the best things. Thank you.

Thanks, Suzanne. We're going to next hear from Michael Yagaman. Michael, you have the floor. You have one minute.

Thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is Michael Yogman. I live on Wyman Road and I'm testifying in strong support of policy order number five and Doug Brown's amendments. More than 2,900 Cambridge citizens from all over the city have so far signed a petition asking you to amend the zoning ordinance to moderate its negative impacts. and tonight both the zoning petition and the policy order number five do exactly what these folks are asking for. The ordinance is a noble idea, but the implementation needs substantial modification. Let us be clear, we support expanding affordable housing options in Cambridge, and don't let anyone dispute our support. but the zoning ordinance is currently structured as having unintended and disruptive impacts on our neighborhoods. Almost all the new development units proposals are for market rate units

They are also demolishing more affordable units and displacing renters and will increase housing costs, not decrease them. Please stop this wholesale giveaway. We ask you to temporarily pause the permitting.

Thank you for your public comment. Thank you. We're going to go back to our list in order with speaker number 40, Elizabeth Meyer, followed by Jeremiah Story, then Paul Fallon. Elizabeth, one minute.

Hi, Elizabeth Meyer, East Cambridge resident. I'm here speaking. to the report on air and field number 174. I like to say that the users of the field are predominantly going to be the community members in East Cambridge as well as the school's children and after-school programs in whatever turn 158 Spring Street will turn into possibly Amigos and possibly a I think that since I'm a resident of the community, I believe that the use of the field now is for Everyone, there are dog walkers, there are people playing pickup soccer, as well as flag football, all sort of things. And if you change it to plastic turf, I think it's a less desirable area to spend time. So I think the general use will go down. Thank you.

Thank you. We're going to go back and hear from Mark Keebler, followed by Jeremy Astori, then Paul Fallon.

Thank you. My name is Mark Kuebler. I live at 52 Porter Street, and I'm here to oppose the Flaherty-Zusy policy order. I support evidence-based review of multifamily housing ordinance. It's good to see how things are working, but we already know what these particular amendments would do and it would be catastrophic for building more affordable housing. Restoring parking minimums in particular can cost six figures per space in Cambridge. That alone threatens to kill small, mid-sized, multi-family projects around the city, and restricting six-story buildings to only the widest streets would effectively eliminate the 20% affordable requirement in most of the neighborhoods. And without that hype on us, these projects just don't pencil out. So housing is still an emergency for younger, working, Rending, Middle Class, Cambridge residents.

I therefore urge the council not to take up this proposal and signal willingness to roll back the court provisions when we know that the consequences will be foreseeable and damaging. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Jeremy Astori. Jeremy, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Jeremy Astori, and I support the revitalization, that's a hard word, of air-run fields with natural grass. I am pro the city council to reject The Ahern Report and oppose the installation of a plastic field. The community is overwhelmingly against plastic turf while in favor of youth sports at Ahern. Our petition has obtained over 2,000 signatures, 75 of which are Cambridge residents. This is the most popular petition on change.org in Cambridge in the last six years and the fifth most popular in 14 years. In contrast, the ProTurf petition has only had one signature in over a week, a single signature in over a week, despite being shared by many sports leagues. At least half of the six public comments are from CYS staff themselves. We've had 54 comments in comparison total. Youth sports parents do not want this either. Most of the sports leagues in support of turning Ahern into plastic have never played in Ahern or indoor leagues.

Team Mr. Huang, we beg you not to destroy our neighborhood park. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Paul Fallon, followed by Melissa Tonachel, then Katherine Ahern. Paul.

Council Chair, my name is Paul Fallon. I have lived at 618 Huron Avenue for 34 years. I am here to speak against policy order number five, making any changes to the multifamily zoning ordinance. Less than a year ago, the citizens of Cambridge elected seven pro-zoning change candidates versus two in opposition, a super majority. Now we see repeated attempts to water down the new zoning ordinance. do not give in. The proposed policy order says that it is trying to rectify unintended consequences of the zoning ordinance. That is completely wrong. More people, higher density, fewer cars are exactly the intended consequences of the current zoning ordinance. It is the direction we all know that we humans need to go in to live in balance with our planet, It's the direction the majority of Cambridge voters want to see our city move. Do not water down the current ordinance with this policy order or any other one.

Stay the course. You have a super majority on your side.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Melissa Tonichel, followed by Katherine Ahern, then Jennifer Britton-Colonese. Melissa, you have one minute.

Thank you. Good evening. My name is Melissa Tonischel. I live at 303 Columbia Street in the Wellington-Harrington neighborhood. My family and I have been in our small home for 25 years and lifelong Cambridge residents. I want to thank my neighbors from across the city who have already articulated important points in support of policy order number five. I want to be very clear that we strongly support the expansion of housing across our city and by that we mean Housing that is well situated, that is affordable, that is accessible, that is family focused, and that does not displace current residents. Having done something bold, the zoning ordinance does not mean that we've yet got it right. I encourage the city council to revisit with respect to all of the points that people are making this evening.

and current neighbors so that this does not remain a developer's game of nine units of unaffordable housing. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Catherine Ahern, followed by Jennifer Brittain Colonese, then Liza Oliver. Catherine?

Hello, my name is Catherine Ahern. I live at 13 7th Street. I'm here regarding agenda item 11 about Ahern Field. I'm not related to the field. There are many logical arguments for and against replacing Ahern Field with turf, but for me this is about values. This decision gets at the heart of the kind of city Cambridge wants to be and the story it tells about itself. Much like any civic mythos, the work of governing and the act of being a neighbor is the work of closing this inevitable gap between our ideal and our reality. It is the work of leaving things better than we found them. Simply put, the decision to turn Ahern Field in East Cambridge into a turf space would move us farther, not closer, to the city we all strive to live in and help realize. I encourage us all to return to the Healthy Parks and Playground Task Force report published in 2009, which makes the case that healthy play depends on contact with nature diverse outdoor environments and community gathering spaces.

Here, the city itself makes an argument and lays out a strategy that is in direct conflict with the current plan to turn Ahern Field into a manufactured surface.

Thank you, Catherine. That's your time. Our next speaker is Jennifer Brittain Colonese, followed by Liza Oliver, then Luca Palma Poth. Jennifer, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, good evening. My name is Jennifer Britton Colonies. I'm a resident at 209 Hurley Street in East Cambridge. I'm also speaking about Ahern Field and in support of myself as a neighbor and a parent. I'm a parent of a soccer player and would like to keep this as is to leave well enough alone. I'm also a nurse practitioner and I see day in and day out the effect of people who don't have enough access to green spaces, livable space where they can Thank you so much for joining us. We do see that plastics, microplastics, these are neuroendocrine disruptors. I am very concerned about long-term health ramifications.

As a parent, I would like to keep this as a grass field. Thank you.

Thank you. We're going to go back to Louise Venden who has joined us. Louise, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Louise Bendon, 10 Rogers Street. We have reduced ourselves to the world of alternative acts and personal attacks that we abhor in our national politics. ABC claims dramatically exaggerate the potential impacts of PO5 by suggesting they eviscerate zoning reforms, bring back exclusionary zoning, and gut the 100% AHO. Well, this five-hour alarm call to action will flood your inboxes and meetings with tear-on-fire statements. These false claims disrespect the counselors who propose consideration of MFF changes. asking for a reasonable data-driven evaluation of a policy that has generated proposals for hundreds of additional housing units and serious concerns from residents and neighborhoods across the city. Promoting emotional attacks undermines the serious discussions the council needs to have.

Imposing large buildings twice and three times the height of surrounding housing may lower values of existing residential properties. Thank you, Louise, for your public comment.

Thank you. We're going to go to Liza Oliver. Liza is not in the room. We will go to Luca, Palma, Poth, followed by Emily Kleinman, then Alan Peterson. Luca, you have the floor. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. I'm Luca Palma Poth, live at 32 High Street. I'm speaking in support of PO number five. I've lived in Cambridge for my entire life and graduated from Sierra Last last year. This city is my home and it is a very special place to me. However, I've seen it change significantly in recent years for the worse as Cambridge's sense of community has been broken down. Much of this has been due to the overdevelopment of Cambridge. Friends of mine from school have had to leave the city due to the incredibly high cost of living. The Multifamily Housing Ordinance is actively making this worse by creating luxury four-story units which overtake neighborhoods and communities. This is not under the guise of affordable housing, but it is not affordable. Projects in my neighborhood like 95 Cushing Street and 33 Thingvalla Ave are luxury units that tower over homes and choke up street parking. My neighbor in Thingvalla Ave is a lifelong Cantabrigian.

his house will soon be surrounded by four-story luxury units casting shadows in his home and restricting places for him to put his car is this how we want to treat the people who have lived in and loved Cambridge for decades do this encourage the city to adopt policy

Thank you, Luca. Please email the remainder of your comment. We will next go to Emily Kleinman. Emily has not joined us. We will go to Alan Peterson, followed by Giorgio Stevens. Alan?

Yes, thank you. I'm here to support or encourage these amendments, number five and The Brown Citizen Petition. The enormously difficult problem of affordable housing. I have young children who are facing this issue. I live at 19 Haskell Street in North Cambridge. I'm also a retired real estate developer. Real estate has to be paid to build these houses. Somebody's got to pay for it, okay? And the city needs to organize itself to build its own. You're not going to be able to get real estate developers to build your affordable housing. Ain't going to happen. You need to amend this thing and be a little more reasonable. It's very complicated. We need affordable housing.

The last overlay zoning isn't the answer. More thoughtful solutions are there. Thank you.

Thanks. Our next speaker is speaker number 50, Giorgio Stevens, followed by Cynthia Hibbard, then Robert O'Neill. Giorgio?

Hi, I'm Georgia Stevens and I'm nine years old. I live in 179 Spring Street and I think that the grass at Ahern Field shouldn't be replaced with turf. and here are a few reasons why. First, Cambridge's strength is that it has the most grass, which makes me think that we should keep it that way instead of weakening the strength of Cambridge. Next, grass is natural, turf is not, and also turf releases plastics which can be dangerous and CYS wants turf because it's flatter and more tidy, but it also gives painful turf burns which aren't fun. Plus, for the first installation, it'll cost $3 to $3.5 million, and you will have to reinstall it every 8 to 10 years. For the reinstallation, it'll cost $1 million. Finally, I play on Team Croatia for CIS, and... I play on grass at Ahern. That's why I have a full season streak. Thank you.

Folks, if you can refrain from clapping, you can do these hands instead, no noise. Yeah, love that, but no clapping per decorum rules. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. We will go to speaker number... Speaker number 51, Cynthia Hibbert, followed by Robert O'Neill, then Christina Louise Gomez. Cynthia?

Good evening, I'm Cynthia Hibbert of 23 Ellsworth Avenue and I'm speaking today for 350 Mass, a climate justice organization. We strongly support the Zero Waste Master Plan ordinance changes referenced in Chartered Rights 1 and 8. Eighty percent of the city's solid waste comes from commercial, institutional, and large residential buildings that the city does not currently manage. the chapter 8.24 ordinance changes would apply to this 80% and fulfill the city manager's goal to quote, realize a future with less trash, More sanitary neighborhoods and more equitable programs. The updated bring your own bag ordinance and the new skip the stuff ordinance are common sense improvements that can both reduce waste and save businesses money. requiring food waste diversion for all buildings is a quadruple win. It will save taxpayers money, reduce rats, provide energy, and reduce landfill waste.

The Council voted unanimously last June, a year ago, to adopt the Zero Waste Management Plan 2.0. Thank you for your public comment. Your time has expired.

Please email the remainder of your comments. Apologies, Madam Mayor. Our next speaker is Robert O'Neill followed by Christina Louise Gomez.

Robert O'Neill, 175 Hallworthy Street. I support and urge the city council to support both policy order five and the Brown petition.

Mr. O'Neill, if you can speak more into the mic.

To evaluate. Sorry. Amendments are necessary to lessen the significant long-term impacts to abutting properties, neighborhoods in the city, as well as minimize the environmental impacts resulting from wholesale demolition, New construction and expansion of buildings to within five feet of property lines. Adjustments to setbacks, green open space, building height, parking, and substantive design review are needed to ensure the city's development and growth provides more needed housing and increased affordability without increased environmental impacts, fewer trees, reduced climate resilience, and irreversibly changing characteristics of the city that current residents have invested in and make it an attractive place to live. How our city develops and grows should not be left to developers with no long-term vested interest in our properties, our neighborhoods, our communities, and our city. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Cristina Luis Gomez followed by Rand Wentworth. Cristina?

Christina Lois-Gomez, I live in 141 Tremont Street, and I'm here to talk about the Ahern Field. My son plays with Cambridge youth soccer at Dunahee Park, so I'm very familiar with artificial turf and its appeal. It looks clean, uniform, well maintained. But I've also seen the issues. For example, this past Saturday, a warm day, the turf felt much hotter than the surrounding grass. That's not just uncomfortable for the kids, but also increases the risk of dehydration, heat stress, and burns when they fall. Last summer, my son even had to leave a soccer summer camp early because the heat made him feel unwell. If you're unsure, try it yourself. Go sit on the turf for one hour and then sit on the grass. The difference is huge. Artificial turf also sheds microplastics, exposes children to chemicals whose long-term effects we don't fully understand.

Even if the turf is dyed green, it's still plastic. Please invest in well-maintained natural grass because all residents, including the kids, deserve that.

Thank you, Christina. Your time is up. Our next speaker is Rand Wentworth. Rand, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Rand, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor.

My name is Rand Wentworth. I live at 19 Brown Street. I started my career as a commercial real estate developer and know a lot about this industry. Then I taught at the Graduate School of Architecture and City Planning at Georgia Tech, and now I'm on the faculty at the Harvard Kennedy School. From this context, I have a lot of respect that this council has a profound responsibility to shape the character of this city for 50 and 100 years from now. I strongly support The provisions to increase affordable housing expand density, especially in commercial corridors and around transit hubs. But we are now seeing some need to amend some of the provisions. And I support strongly policy order number five and Doug Brown's Citizens Petition.

We think that these will address negative unintended consequences of the original policy. Most citizens of Cambridge, I believe, would support common sense.

Thank you Rand. Your time has expired. Please email the remainder of your comment to citycouncil at cambridgema.gov. Our next speaker is Nahid Trevedi, followed by Michael Stevens, then Arjun Jai Kumar. Nahid, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yes, please go ahead.

Okay, I just want to speak in opposition to policy order number five. I appreciate some of the concerns that have been raised. And at the same time, we have I did hear a couple comments that I would just like to respond to some ideas that increasing or up zoning leads to higher Real Estate Prices. There are plenty of examples from Portland, Oregon to Minneapolis, Austin, Buffalo, Charlotte, where those cities upzoned. and the prices of real estate came down or the cost of living came down both from rents and from the cost of housing. And so I would encourage the city to keep its focus on maintaining the multifamily housing Overlay, continuing to ensure that we can build housing in the city and make it affordable for many families to stay here as many other cities have done successfully. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Michael Stevens, followed by Arjun Jayakumar, then Laura Holson. Michael, one minute.

Hi, y'all. I'm Mike Stevens from 179 Spring Street. As Jeremy Astori reminded us before, there are two petitions about the turf at Ahern Field. I know a petition is not a survey. It's not a neutral piece of data collection. But I want to assure you that those surveys has penetrated very deeply. They've been shared, both of them, and to Cambridge Youth Soccer's credit, they have shared the competing petition as well with the soccer families through their listservs. They've been on Cambridge parents' listservs. They've been posted all over the place. I've seen them on signs all over East Cambridge. For both of the two petitions, they've been very, very widely seen. After Cambridge Youth Soccer posted their petition to their listserv with all the sports families, it was quite remarkable because there was actually a pretty big surge in anti-TERF petition signers. In fact, right now, 2,500 people have weighed in.

2,000 support a grass field at Ahern, and a little less than 500, I believe right now, support the turf. So I just want to remind you that the group that's advocating for turf claims to represent soccer families and sports families, and they largely do not. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Arjun Jaikumar, followed by Laura Holson. Arjun, one minute.

Good evening. My name is Arjun J. Kumar, 175 Richdale Avenue. I'm here to speak regarding policy order number five. First, I want to congratulate this buddy on the multifamily housing ordinance. It's a significant achievement targeted at one of the most acute political challenges of the day. which is affordability. I caution against moving too quickly to take maybe well-intentioned steps that may render it toothless. The order refers to addressing unintended consequences, but respectfully, I don't think that's quite right. The way that I'd put it is that there are trade-offs inherent in all major policy decisions of this type, and there are seldom perfectly elegant solutions to problems with the gravity of affordability. At bottom, you have done something major and it is working. Please give it a chance to work.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Laura Holson, followed by Buchanan Ewing, then Sunny Gupta. Laura?

Hello, Laura Holson, 37 Fulkerson Street. News flash, Ahern Field is not just for soccer. It is a community resource. Although the city manager report claims that the community was involved in the process, this is not true. The community that lives around the field has clearly come out to voice support for keeping the grass. We made this clear during the tabling events last year, and we are making it clear right now with our petition that has over 2,000 supporters. Fake grass will not serve our community in an equitable manner. It is too hot, too unsafe, and too plastic to welcome all of the uses that many people enjoy at Ahern Field. Please hear our voice and keep our little slice of natural grass in East Cambridge. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Buchanan Ewing, followed by Sunny Gupta, then Johanny Maria Castillo. Buchanan has not joined. We are moving on to speaker number 60, Sunny Gupta. Sunny, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hello. Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to speak. This is Sunny Gupta, resident of 37 Fulkerson Street, Cambridge. I am here to express my support for keeping Ahern Field as a natural grass field. A grass field is a healthier, more environmentally responsible choice for students, families, and community. It helps reduce heat, support water absorption, and avoid concerns connected to synthetic material. Ahern Field should be safe, welcoming, and sustainable space for all community members to play together and enjoy for years to come. I urge City to choose natural grass and invest in maintaining it well. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Johanny Maria Castillo, followed by Alex Marthews, then Paola Rabusco. Johanny, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hello, my name is Johanny Maria Castillo. I am speaking on item number 11. I am an East Cambridge resident mother of three and soccer parent. I am speaking in support of synthetic field in East Cambridge. I have seen firsthand how difficult it can be for local families to access field. As my son was growing up, I had to drive into different locations like MIT and Harvard to get access to play. While I was fortunate to have a car, many East Cambridge families do not have that option. I hear that there are a lot of votes Thank you very much. This is something that we really want and really need access to play for all. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Alex Marthews, followed by Paola Rabusco, then Laura Booth. Alex, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Alex, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor. We will circle back to Alex Marthews. We're going to go on to Paola Rebusco. Paola, one minute.

Yep. Hi, everyone. Paola Rebusco, 179 Spring Street. I used a GenAI tool that we use to check when students have shared answers to compare the city manager's report and the first version of the fake grass petition. The answer was, notable overlap in language and ideas. There is also strong similarity in rhetoric and structure. And I went on comparing specific vocabulary. Both the report and the petition lacked documentation. The report is yet another attempt by a small number of well-connected people to force fake grass on the same people they want to help and I believe that they want to help. The report provides unjustified numbers with math mistakes and it is in fact checked. Where are the reports from the public health department and technical experts on the health and environmental impact of microplastics and heat? Misinformation leads to disinformation. In education, we fail students who fail to show evidence.

I urge you not to perpetrate injustice and to be remembered for listening to the people of Cambridge who overwhelmingly want to play sports and meet others on real ground.

Thank you, your time is up. You can email the remainder of your comments. Our next speaker is Laura Booth

Hi, good evening and thank you. My name is Laura Booth. I live at 303 Columbia Street, lifelong resident of the city of Cambridge. I'm an abutter to a project now in progress that my partner Melissa Tonichel spoke of earlier. and it's full compliance with the current developer playbook. Nine units, no affordability, no accessibility. I speak in full support of housing and housing stability. This ordinance is displacing people in support of corporate greed. Make it 10 units, make it 15 units to kick in affordability, put in an elevator to make units accessible, preserve green space, and you would have my full support. I appreciate your time and consideration. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Jessamai Roble followed by Karen Harmon.

Hi, Jessamy Robley, 362 Rinjav, more commonly known as The Towers. I'm the director of Cambridge Youth Soccer, but instead speaking as a mother regarding the life-changing benefits the turf at Russell Field has given to my son. and the hundreds and hundreds of children that live in the surrounding affordable housing communities. Since moving to the towers a decade ago, Russell Field has been the most influential part of my family's success and happiness. Having access to Russell Field has allowed our children to have access to safe space to play 365 days a year. The benefits to their physical and mental health, sense of self, their ability to gather with their peers and build a community is incalculable. In a world of screens and iPhone, Russell Field has been the most important factor to their quality of life, personal achievements, and happiness. Because we've chosen to live in a city, the most important factor for me is the well-being overall, health, and Thank you. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Karen Harmon.

I don't see Karen in the Zoom. We'll go to Janet Gattis. Janet, you're unmuted. Go ahead.

Yes, I hear. Thank you, Madam Chair. Janet Gouda, 71 Fulkerson Street. I'm speaking against the plastic turf for a Heron Field. My husband John Hand and I are in our mid-80s. We use the track at Ahern Field every day for our walk. We go four to six times around. We enjoy the dogs playing on the field, rolling on the grass, the birds looking for worms, and chirping in happiness. We enjoy the foliage on the trees as we walk by. We do not want nature to be taken from our neighborhood, a densely inhabited area. The green grass is our nature playground. Being close to nature is important as we age to keep us vital and able to age in place. We do not want the plastic turf. Please do not put it down. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Andrew Ong. Andrew, you're muted. Go ahead.

Hello, my name is Andrew Ong, and I live at 64 Willow Street. I am a parent of three children, and I'm here to speak about Ahern Field. My children play at CYS, and we do not support their push for a plastic turf field. CYS does not speak for our family despite their claims to. Additionally, I am a former collegiate soccer player and I never once played on a plastic turf until high school and it did not hamper my ability to grow or develop as a player in any way. However, today I would like to address the city's maintenance of fields and facilities and its impact it has on this decision. Part of the conversation revolves around the poor condition in which Ahern Field remains. However, the city's prized park, Danahay Park, has three turf fields. all of which are already at end of life. Two of them are 12 years old, years past the recommended age, and another is at 10 years old. Replacement of those three fields is going to cost at least $3 million each, a total of $9 million. Is the city looking to spend $12 million on plastic for it?

That doesn't seem to make sense in alignment with the city's priorities, nor the community and its neighbors. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Our next speaker is John Lively, followed by Yun Kunis. John, you have one minute. Please go ahead. John Lively, you have the floor if you can unmute yourself.

Thank you. I've unmuted myself. Hello, City Council. I'm John Lively, 10 Upton Street. I'm here to speak on City Manager's Agenda Item 11 in support of artificial turf at Ahern Field. Yes, I'm a coach and league coordinator for 225 kids, treasurer and board member of Cambridge Youth Soccer, and I'm sure you've heard about the great impact of play in sports on youth. but I'm also a plastic sustainability expert with over 25 years of experience and a degree in environmental science and public policy. In my many years at work here, the trade-offs that Cambridge is wrestling with right now are very difficult and they've happened many times and I'm really grateful that the city is wrestling with them. However, I'm firmly in support of the turf field. I think it will help unlock many hours of our kids playing sports. outweighing the negative impacts of a turf field at Ahern. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Yun Kunis. Yun, I apologize if I am mispronouncing your name. You have the floor, one minute.

Thank you. Can you hear me now?

We can. Please go ahead.

Yeah, so my name is Yun Kunz. I live at 5 Whiteman Road. I am here to support the proposals in policy order number five and the Doc Brown petition. For anybody who has read those, these are very thoughtful and very moderate proposals to counter the unintended consequences The off-ride zoning is producing on the street at Cambridge. To characterize this anti-housing is disingenuous and is not facts-based analysis. I lived and worked in the city for many years. I asked each councilor to look at the facts. which many of our speakers today have outlined and search your conscience and not be influenced by the money from developers. You were elected by Cambridge residents. We count on you. whereas the developers who rushed into our neighborhood.

Thank you, Yun. Please email the remainder. We're going to go back to Buchanan-Ewing, see if they are able to unmute. Buchanan, you have the floor. One minute.

Thank you. Can you hear me?

We can. Please go ahead.

I'm a longtime resident. I must park on the street. Some of us may have to move away. Old residents without driveways are being squeezed off our own blocks. First bike lanes remove on-street parking. For 20 years on Upper Antrim, I parked within 100 feet of my home. Now I have to park on Fayette, Inman, Amory, and as far away as Norfolk occasionally. Second, developers can now build multi-family buildings with no on-street parking, no on-site parking. even when the street is full. So every new car from these buildings will compete for the same overloaded spaces. These policies create a predictable crisis. Less supply, more demand, no real mitigation. For people with age-related limitations or health issues, walking several blocks to park in the snow and ice is not going to work. So I ask three things. One is measure the parking numbers and post them.

Two, require off-street parking. And three, build new permits.

Thank you for your public comment. Thank you, Buchanan. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker, we are at speaker number 71, Julia Stevens, followed by Divya Gupta, then Paul Cote. Julia?

Hi, I'm Julia, and I live at 179 Spring Street. I'm here to support real, well-maintained grass at Ahern Field instead of plastic grass. Ahern Field is everybody's backyard and a place where few are lucky enough to have one attached to their house. It's where we go to enjoy a picnic with friends, meet friendly dogs or observe bunnies while they frolic, have water fights, learn to do cartwheels, meet new people at any time of day. It's where East Cambridge babies learn to walk. Covering Ahern Field in artificial turf is telling all of us that we are not welcome unless we play soccer, which we aren't even able to play if it's too hot out. It's turning a field for everything into a field only for soccer. Grass is forgiving, as I've already said. When you fall, you land on a soft, fresh surface that will bounce back as soon as your weight is off of it. Grass won't melt your shoes or release microplastics into your body or the environment. Well-maintained grass doesn't cost $3 million.

Please, please don't cover Ahern Field in real grass. Grass is for everyone.

Thank you for your testimony, Julia. You can email us the remainder of your comment. Our next speaker is Divya Gupta, followed by Paul Cote, then Ruth Allen.

Zubia Gupta, I live near Ahern Field in East Cambridge. I love Ahern Field because the grass is really soft and me and my friends play there like really frequently. And we love lying down on the grass, relaxing there, doing whatever, and just being kids. Artificial turf is really bad for the environment. It heats it up. It also costs a lot. A million dollars every ten years plus to maintain every year and it's inconvenient for locals because There won't be any dog walking there, no running during hot days, and no spending time there just lying down on the grass, like during the summer or anything.

and the people who want to play here, they won't even use it too often.

They just occupy it like once twice. We're next going to hear from Paul Cote, followed by Ruth Allen, then Moje Rohani. Paul?

Thank you. I'm Paul Cote, 85 6th Street. I'm here to speak about Ahern Field. I wish I didn't have to come here to say this, but let me tell you what happened about a year ago today. I went to an open house at Ahern Field to talk about the city's planned improvements. and was surprised to hear that one of the planned improvements was to remove almost all the grass and replace it with a big wad of unrecyclable plastic. I thought, well, I'm glad you're here because that's an idea that we don't like. Me, my neighbors, think that's a bad idea. And I was informed, too bad, that plan is already finished. So I went home puzzled. I looked up the city business and saw indeed this plan had been hatched with no public engagement and virtually no notice. Luckily,

It's not too late for you to undo this miserable situation. Undo it, please. Thank you.

Thanks. Our next speaker is Ruth Allen, followed by Mojde Rahani, then Catherine Silvestri. Ruth, one minute.

Hi, thank you. I'm here to discuss actually two in support of number one, Managers Agenda Item 11. I live at 48 Fenno Street, Cambridge. My girls have been playing on the fields in Danahy as well as Ahern and different ones. These kids are getting hurt. The new turf is different than the old turf. It's not all as it used to be. So we really have to look at that. You know, our kids, especially the girls who, you know, are trying to play, they get canceled all the time. These would not, wouldn't have to cancel as many games for these kids. and Support Order 5.

And also, please table Policy Order 2026-110 for small businesses. It's killing me.

Thanks, Ruth. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Moshe Rohani, followed by Catherine Silvestri, then Jason Targoff. Mojde, if you can unmute yourself, you have one minute.

Good evening. I'm speaking in support of PO number three. My name is Mojde Rouhani, and I'm the executive director of De Novo. At a time when many of our most fundamental rights and protections are under attack, we must remain steadfast in our commitment to those who are most vulnerable. De Novo, alongside our partners, serve survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, hate crimes, torture, exploitation, and other forms of victimization. Your support of policy order number three is more than sustaining services. It is about ensuring that survivors continue to have access to safety, healing, justice, and hope. It is about demonstrating that our community believes that lives can be rebuilt, healing is possible, and resilience can be take root when people are supported and when we refuse to leave anyone behind. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Catherine Silvestri. Catherine, you have one minute. Katherine has not joined. We will go to Jason Targoff, followed by Alan Joslin.

Good evening, I'm Jason Targoff of Four Olive Place. I'm the president of Cambridge Youth Soccer, and I'm one of the group of 27 sports leaders from Cambridge organizations who wrote into the council with support for the city's plans at Ahern. And we support this plan not because we don't share the environmental concerns or because we want to develop elite athletes to win state titles or go on to play college sports. I and the youth leaders in general support the city's plans because we believe that having local opportunities to play is worth making compromises for. Because we should all recognize that something has to be compromised. There is no grass field in Cambridge that can be played on without closures and rest and that can accommodate the play that Ahern has. It is important for family to see that even though they are not shelling out thousands for club or travel sports, that the city values them and provides them the best quality experience they can.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Alan Jocelyn, followed by Nick Herbold, then Kate Gilmore. Alan, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Okay. Hi, can you hear me?

Yes, we can. Please go ahead.

My name is Alan Joslin. I live at 36 Bank Street. I'm speaking tonight as a representative of the Cary Corner Neighborhood Association in support of policy order number five. We all agree Cambridge needs to increase housing, particularly affordable. Kerry Corner is not asking to stop housing. We're asking to be built in a way that protects neighbors, livability, and truly delivers affordable housing goals that our community expects. Please look more carefully at references quoted as the successes in Portland, Minneapolis, Houston, and Raleigh. They have handled the challenge with a thoughtfulness in city planning not present in our city's blanket upzoning. Since the multifamily zoning changes were adopted, we've seen significant unintended consequences across neighborhoods. Development that appears focused more on profit and intensity than on the outcomes that were promised. In particular, residents remain concerned about the effects

of approved projects akin to the six-story Chabad facility on Bank Street on privacy, light, open space, traffic safety, food service, hygiene, street content.

Thank you, Alan. Please email the remainder of your comment. Our next speaker is Nick Harbold. Nick, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Good evening, Nick Kerbold and I live on Vassal Lane. I'm here to speak in favor of the synthetic turf at Ahern. If we expect and hope these fields will see lots of traffic from active kids and community members, we need durable routes. I help facilitate the soccer nights program in North Cambridge where we get to use Russell Fields. It's a week-long program engaging 350 players and volunteers. We only run the program for one week a year and it's devastating when we need to cancel. So having a turf field makes it easy to run even in inclement weather. As a parent looking to raise young kids, I recognize how fortunate we are to live near Danahy and Russell Fields. My hope in supporting this decision is that families in East Cambridge have walkable access to similar resources. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is speaker number 80, Kate Gilmore, followed by Mary Jane Kornacki, then Jacob Silverson. Kate, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Good evening, Councilors. My name is Kate Gilmore. I'm the Director of Real Estate at Homeowners Rehab at 280 Franklin Street. I'm speaking this evening against Policy Order Number 5. If you've walked, biked, taken the bus, or driven between Harvard and Porter Squares recently, you've seen Four Melon Street. Our first AHO-permitted, 100% affordable project under construction. We're more than 70% complete and on track to finish by year-end so we can welcome 29 families into their new homes in early 2027. But this policy order would have made our project impossible. The size of the site did not allow for any surface parking and excavating for below grade parking is cost prohibitive. More than half of our three bedroom units would have been downsized to two bedroom units to accommodate the setback requirements. This policy order directly conflicts with the city's commitment to build affordable housing that ensures individuals and families can stay and thrive in Cambridge.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Mary Jane Kornacki, followed by Jacob Silverson.

Hello. Mary Jane Kornacki, 103 Avon Hill Street. I am here to strongly support policy order number five. This is directly from that proposed policy order. The adoption and implementation of the multifamily zoning ordinance has led to significant unintended consequences across all neighborhoods as real estate development activity has increasingly focused on maximizing profits while avoiding the provision of income restricted affordable housing. That is what we're trying to deal with. That's obviously an inconvenient truth for those who believe private developers will lower housing costs. They will not. We've heard from developers about that issue. We do not need to eviscerate our tree canopy, degrade available open space, create heat islands to house more people, which we need to do. The proposed amendments represent a reasonable way forward to enrich Cambridge as a livable city with housing that meets Envision Cambridge goals.

Now, I may be demented as the only person in this room who believes in Envision Cambridge, but I do. and when you look at the intertwined goals of housing, social justice, Thank you Mary Jane, your time has expired.

Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Jacob Silverson followed by Charles Franklin.

Okay.

Jack Silverson, 103 Avon Hill Street, Cambridge. I implore you to pass policy order number five. The aim is to improve the multifamily housing ordinance in order to address the many negative and unintended, yes, unintended consequences I would hope so. It is produced during destroying, including destroying naturally occurring affordable housing units, the very thing people say they want, destruction of neighborhoods and property values by building housing way out of scale to the existing housing, adding housing units with no requirements for the provision of parking while promoting the building of market rate housing which will not be affordable to the very people who were led to believe that this multi-family housing ordinance would help. the very people who were told this would help them it's not going to help them because it's only going to produce by and large market rate housing. I don't know how often it needs to be said and I would implore

the city council make it clear to all your constituents what the difference is between income restricted housing which is affordable housing and market rate housing and that's what the difference is thank you very much our next speaker is Charles Franklin

Charles. You have one minute, please go ahead.

Charles Franklin, 160 Hampshire Street. Good evening, council. The 2026 AHO report has shown definitively that the affordable housing overlay is doing what it's supposed to do, build housing. So far, it's built 1,500 homes. Although we are behind on the 2030 goal, we are way ahead of the prediction of zero by some of its doubters. Switching to the multi-family housing ordinance, I can see arguments for some adjustments such as step backs above certain heights or mansard requirements as these would still allow significant amounts of housing to be built while addressing some legitimate concerns. However, I do not believe that any measures suggested by PO number five should be implemented. They are exactly counter to the goals of the MFH petition, a major one of which was to bring existing homes into compliance. Please vote this down. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Kenny Hota. Kenny, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

My name is Kenny Hoda, 303 3rd Street. I'm speaking to the city manager's Ahern report. I'm also the parent of a second grader, an athlete in Cambridge Public Schools, and we do not support plastic turf at Ahern. My family rents in East Cambridge. We do not have a backyard. I feel the need to say that plainly because parents raising children in high rises like mine, and we are many, have been dismissed by Plastic Turf supporters as NIMBYs simply for asking for transparency and solid information before making a decision that affects our children's health and our neighborhood school. I am against the $3.5 million installation of toxic plastic turf and the subsequent millions of dollars of maintenance and replacement costs that it will generate. We are in a funding drought and we have bigger needs such as supporting policy order number three. Please help my neighbors feel welcome in their own neighborhood.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Anne Coburn, followed by Jennifer Brill, then Ben Wagner. Anne has not joined us. We will go to... and Coburn. One minute.

Hello, my name is Anne Coburn. I live at 117A Otis Street, which is between Ahern Field and Gold Star Mothers Park, and I am here to support grass at Ahern Field. The City of Cambridge intends to spend in excess of $3 million on installing artificial turf at Ahern Field. That's about 20% of the total budget for the entire 158 Spring Street and Ahern Field rehab project. To me, that's an odd choice for a field next to the former Kennedy Longfellow building, a school that deeply suffered from lack of equity and was closed partially to address that lack of equity. If you want to pursue real equity, I suggest reviewing the actual demographics, field use, and diverse community needs of the people of all ages including those with limited mobility. because East Cambridge has the highest rate of disability in the city.

You can't replicate Russell Field in East Cambridge because geography is history. These are not the same places and they have different needs.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Jennifer Brill, followed by Ben Wagner, then Carolyn Hunt.

Hi, I'm Jennifer Brill. I live at 138 Western Ave. I'm speaking on policy order number five. And I'm here to talk about the current impact on direct abutters. Some of you know me personally. I'm a social worker. I've spent the last 40 years providing mental health services to Cambridge's most vulnerable residents. Many live in affordable housing. I'm strongly in favor of affordable housing. I'm not unreasonable. I'm not wealthy. I'm not anti-housing. The Western Ave lot is big. Something will and should be built there. But microcontext matters. My two-story house faces sideways. You can't see this, but... There would be a six-story wall of windows and overhanging balconies looming just six feet from my front stoop. That's not reasonable, as most of you have privately agreed.

Director Butters need a voice and need to be heard by the city, not just by writing comments into a Zoom with a developer who has no reason to listen. Thank you, Jennifer.

Your time has expired. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Ben Wagner, followed by Carolyn Hunt, then Dave Slaney. Ben? Ben is not with us. We're going to go to Carolyn Hunt.

Hi, my name's Carolyn Hunt. I live at 106 Berkshire Street, and I'm here to talk about CMA 2026-174. I'm here by myself because my husband and kid just wrapped up their last Cambridge Youth Soccer practice of the year. over here in Cambridgeport and their wonderful coaches surprised them by having an ice cream truck show up and let the kids have as much ice cream as they wanted. They had a pizza party. It was awesome. We love Cambridge youth soccer. We love youth sports. My kid's been playing in Cambridge youth soccer for seven years. and we really appreciate all of the hard work that all of the volunteers do for our kids and we strongly support youth athletic opportunities for kids But I'm very anti the idea of putting in fake plastic turf over a Hearn field. We have been going to Donaghy for all soccer games for years. That's where they play their games. We all gather.

We practice in our communities, and we want to keep it that way. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Dave Slaney, followed by Zora Coburn-Zeller, then Courtney Cogswell. Dave, one minute.

Hi, my name is Dave Slaney, 237 Norfolk Street. I'm speaking in opposition to policy order number five and the Brown petition. Last year, the City Council finally acted to effectively encourage and facilitate the construction of desperately needed housing, including affordable housing. Now, some people want to undo the positive steps the council has taken. If those people have a better plan to actually build more housing, they should put it forward. In the meantime, the council should not back away from the positive pro-housing steps it has taken. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Zora Coburn-Zeller, followed by Courtney Cogswell and Rachel Henke. Zora?

Zora was too sad to come, but she wanted me to let you know that when she thinks about home, it's there.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Courtney Cogswell.

Yeah, we don't have to... I'm gonna just leave now, okay?

Courtney? Courtney Cogswell, you have the floor. Courtney, you need to unmute on your end. There you go.

Hi, my name is Courtney Cogswell. I live at 106 Fifth Street, and I'm speaking about the report on the Hearn Field. I live two blocks from Ahern and strongly support keeping natural grass there. Engagement from East Cambridge residents did not play an important role in the decision for turf. My family attended the June 23rd pop-up event held at Calo and did not come away from with the understanding that turf had already been decided by the city. So it came as a great surprise when the March 11th presentation touted artificial turf and sports lighting as a fixed design choice and that the field's priority was organized sports. The heat island effects caused by artificial turf are well documented in research. Cambridge Urban Forest Master Plan five-year update shows that we have the least canopy cover in East Cambridge. A heat island

Adding is not logical and undermines the city's sustainability goals.

Thank you, Courtney. Our next speaker is Rachel Hanke, followed by Sandy Gould, then Andrew Kim.

Hello, Rachel Hanke, 17 Dunnell Street. I'm a parent of three Cambridge kids and an organizer of youth baseball. And I'm here in support of city manager's Ahern turf field recommendation and plug for CRLS baseball semifinals tomorrow. I hope to see many of you out there. I have read the city manager's report and I understand that turf has a huge advantage over grass in terms of playable hours and all weather use. Grass is not well suited for youth sports. I am 100% advocate and I give all of my time for youth sports and I 100% believe in the power of it building communities just like we've seen on the baseball team It builds people talking to each other across languages, cultures. It creates mentors for kids. We need to support youth sports. It will help us build community and address some of the more meaningful environmental challenges that we have ahead of us if we can work together as a community. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Sandy Gould. Sandy, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Sandy Gould and I live at 23R Fairmont Street in Cambridgeport. I'm speaking in reference to City Manager's Agenda Item 11, Conversion of a Hearn Field to a Synthetic Surface. I am a longtime soccer coach and volunteer with Cambridge Youth Soccer. and over the past 10 years, I've been deeply involved in the girls soccer programs with CYS. I am strongly in support of the proposal to upgrade Ahern Athletic Fields to a synthetic surface. I have coached and run soccer programs at Ahern Field for many years. While it is a wonderful space, the grass is often nearly unplayable due to poor drainage and holes that develop because of hard use. During one particularly rainy spring season, we had to cancel almost half of our weekly Saturday sessions An issue that would have been avoided with synthetic turf. This field serves a wide range of groups including KALO organizations, formerly KALO organizations, local charter schools, softball teams from the Biotech League, volleyball players, and adult flag football teams.

This use is simply too much for a natural grass field. Please support the conversion to a synthetic field. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Andrew Kim, followed by Daniel Maskup, then Glenna Wyman. Andrew, one minute.

Thank you. Hello, my name is Andrew Kim. I live on Dudley Street, and I'm with the Democratic Socialists of America. I'm here once again to speak on ShotSpotter. On Policy Order 4, it is obvious that this is an attempt to keep a deeply unpopular, unfair, and immoral surveillance system in this city by weaponizing the processes of our democracy against its spirit. and it should be equally obvious to the council to not undermine the voice of the people of Cambridge and vote against this order. As to policy order number two, this looks like a policy worded in order to give the appearance of meeting the demands of the public yet does nothing to address the underlying inequalities that were a central point of opposition to ShotSpotter. Invasive surveillance cannot be solved with different surveillance, and over-policing cannot be solved with more police. and the vague gesture to community partners after a frankly near exhaustive list of law enforcement and government groups cast doubt upon the intent of this policy order to actually listen to the people of Cambridge.

The city needs to seek new solutions to keeping its citizens safe in real concert with its citizens, not fall back to the same methods that haven't worked. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Daniel Mascu. Daniel, one minute. Please go ahead. Daniel, you're unmuted but we can't hear you. Daniel, we will come back to you. We are going to speaker number 97, Glenna Wyman. Glenna, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor. Glenna Wyman. Yes, we can hear you.

I am an East Cambridge resident. I use Ahern Field as a place of solids to walk around on the lovely grass. anyone who lives in East Cambridge knows we don't have you know for the most part we don't really have yards in open space and one of the parks is now are closed because of asbestos that they're trying to mitigate. Ahern Field is very close to where I live. We see bunnies there. We see all kinds of You know, passive activities that are great, like pig thinking and whatever. So keep our Herne Field grasses. Number two, I'm opposed to poly... Policy Order No.

2 and 4, which I believe are attempts to undermine the surveillance that seems to happen in communities of color. And No. 5. I think it should be chartered. It should be chartered.

Thanks, Glenna. Please email the rest. We're going to go back to Daniel Mascu, followed by Tian Feng, then O. Robert Simha. Daniel, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor, you have one minute.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can. Please go ahead.

Daniel, Mass Group 37, Spyridakis, Terrace. I'm speaking in opposition to policy order number five and the Brown petition. This policy order is being proposed by counselors who have consistently opposed multifamily zoning and are part of the self-taught I think it's clear what the purpose of this is. The fact is that we continue to disagree about this important issue. The majority of the city and voters continue to support more housing in the city. which will help address the housing crisis. Just because there's continued disagreement does not mean that there are unintended consequences. Directing city staff to research zoning policies in direct opposition to the goals of multifamily zoning is not compromised, nor is it good policy. Please do not indulge this policy order or this petition. If there are productive things to research or to do that will help address actual unintended consequences, that would be productive and that is not this. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Tian Fang followed by O. Robert Simha, then Jenny Casildo. Tian has not joined us. We will try O. Robert Simha.

Hello, I'm not Bob Simha. I'm speaking for him. He has asked me to speak in his first slot, if that's okay?

Nope. It needs to be the person that was signed up to speak. Robert Simha is on the Zoom. Robert, if you can unmute yourself, please go ahead. You have one minute.

I'd like to defer to Abigail Bowen if she's available.

Unfortunately, Robert, we can only go in the order of folks that are signed up, so you have one minute. Please go ahead.

I will speak for, we're representing the East Cambridge Open Space Trust. For East Cambridge families, the Hearn Field is a beloved neighborhood green space, a place for unstructured play, The nearby spaces cited in the city's report are small, passive, and constrained. They do not substitute for what are earned We urge that the field remain in grass and be expanded in grass uses rather than the synthetic turf that has been proposed. Thank you

Thank you and for just for future reference for folks we do go by the list in the order that folks were signed up and for fairness we stick to our rules So we're going to go on to Jenny Casildo, Sarah Nelson, then Anna Astori. And Abigail, you can email your comments. Jenny Casildo? Jenny has not joined us. We're going to go to Sarah Nelson followed by Anna Astori.

My name is Sarah Nelson. I live at 17 Rockwell Street. Policy Order No. 5 and Brown Citizen Policy Order are not a rejection of affordable housing. They are an acknowledgment that growth without guardrails is not progress, it is negligence. New development is concentrating in the most dense, diverse, and historically redlined neighborhoods. Not by plan, but because the land there is cheaper. Working families bought there. Now developers are buying their homes and building luxury housing. And our inspectional services can't keep up. Two weeks ago, a demolition on my street proceeded without asbestos clearance. The front of the building dropped onto an electrical pole. My neighbor was sitting in her front room. Another was filming in the street. There was no one managing pedestrian traffic. A cloud of demolition dust likely containing lead spread across the street where two young children live.

On another project, no one figured out where the sewage lines would go until a mature public tree was in the way. When you triple the permits, you triple the mistakes. And some of those mistakes are dangerous.

Thanks, Sarah. Your time is expired. Please email us the remainder. Our next speaker is Anna Astori, followed by Ellen Minahan, then Maria Kosovsky. We're at speaker number... 102. Anna, if you can unmute yourself, you have the floor.

Hello, good evening. Can you hear me okay?

Yes, we can.

Thank you. I'm a resident of East Cambridge, and I urge the council to preserve natural grass at Ahern Field and provide appropriate maintenance to it. We keep hearing that turf benefits children by enabling a few more hours of organized sports per week. But what about the rest of the week? What about the many more kids who don't play soccer? The kids who live here are supposed to be able to kick a ball with their friends, walk the dog, fly a kite, read under a tree, and they won't be able to do any of that on a plastic field that's baking under the sun. That's especially unfair to children who can't participate in organized sports at all for physical, financial, or other reasons. They lose the park entirely. and kids should be able to play soccer and do everything else on a well-maintained modern grass field. It doesn't have to be plastic. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Ellen Minahan, followed by Maria Kosovsky, then Caroline Hunter. Ellen, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, City Council. Ellen Minahan. I reside at 139 Otis Street in East Cambridge. I'm writing to ask the City Council to please consider The plan and speak against artificial turf at our current field and in favor of maintaining that field as natural grass. I urge the City Council to please consider and weigh heavily the environmental impacts of artificial turf in East Cambridge, an incredibly Densely built, densely occupied neighborhood. The impact of a heat sink as well as microplastics in our environment and water. I also urge the City Council to recognize that Ahern Field acts as the backyard for many citizens of East Cambridge. As you've heard today, many of us live on very small properties without access to our own outdoor space. and I would like to keep this a vibrant and multidisciplinary use field that welcomes all. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Maria Marisko-Kasavsky. Maria has not joined us. We are going to Caroline Hunter, followed by Neil Leavitt, then Priscilla Allen. Caroline Hunter, you have the floor. You have one minute.

Yes. Hi. Can you hear me?

We can. Please go ahead.

Yes. I want to talk about two things. Shot spotter. To use Chicago data, to try to eliminate shot spotting Cambridge's Lulucus. Chicago is 22 times the size of Cambridge. Chicago has 2.73 million people. Cambridge has 122,000. Cambridge has 4.4 cops per thousand people. Chicago has 2.4. So the response data and the use of that data is flawed. When we talk about the housing and multi... Thank you. Thank you. with the pace of development. We don't have enough police to supervise the developments. And as Sarah Nelson said, we've had unintended consequences by not having asbestos removal and not having proper supervision. It's important for the city to adjust and make the responsible changes.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Neil Levitt. Neil, you have one minute.

I'm Neil Levitt, and I live at 113 7th Street, and I'm talking about Ahern Field, and I would like to keep Ahern Field grass. Building the newest form of artificial turf on Hearn Field will subject sports players and school children to extreme heat in May, June, July, August, September, possibly even April and October. Please do not do this. Keeping natural grass on the Hearn Field is the better option with an indoor backup plan on days with extreme heat, wind-driven rain, and other forms of inclement weather. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Priscilla Allen. We are at speaker number 107. Priscilla, please go ahead. You have the floor.

My name is Priscilla Allen of 20 Peter Street. I have two sons at Amigos, both of whom also play soccer and Cambridge soccer on Danahy and Donnelly fields. I am not in support of replacing natural grass at a herned field, however, with hot plastic grass. I largely question the motives behind such a covert push for fake grass. CYS Kickstart director Andy Farr, who is the author of the ProTurf petition, is also co-founder of Hands-On Consulting, which for the past 20 years has been in the business of quote, increasing toy and consumer product success as stated from their website. From those who are pro-turf, Diddy also mentioned that his business specializes in product licensing, Product Development, Strategic Marketing, and various other business-focused objectives. Is a plastic field not basically a very large play space? So what's the real motivation behind removing natural grass to replace it with fake grass? Who is really benefiting here?

Kids playing on 130 degree plastic grass? I think not. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Andrew Farrar, followed by Shaithia Alam, then Dulce Ferreira. Andrew?

Hello, Mayor Sumble and the City Council. My name is Andy Ferrer for Lawrence Street, and I'm speaking in favor of the City Manager's item number 11, the installation of a synthetic surface at Ahern Field. When Cambridge renovated CRLS, the city made deliberate choices to preserve and expand space for art, music, theater, dance, and science. Those choices added cost and construction materials, but they reflected the values we have for education. We understand that children need more than classrooms. They need resources that help them play and grow. In 2011-2012, Celebrate CRLS introduced the renovated school to the community. I led tours, including for Mary Ann Schlesinger, class of 1930, aged 82. When she saw all of the art and other spaces, she said, wow, what fun. Cambridge needs to make the same kind of investment in play.

Play is not optional. It is fundamental.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Shaithia Alam followed by Dulce Ferreira. Shaithia, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Shaithia Anusha Alam. I'm from North Cambridge and I'm speaking on City Manager's Report 2026-174. Through my experience with programs like soccer nights and having attended PAWS when I was at Calo and CCSC, I've learned about what matters most is having accessible, well-maintained public spaces, which doesn't necessarily mean installing synthetic turf, although that is what I would prefer. It means that the city is committing to maintaining the field so it remains welcoming for everyone who uses it. As a field shared by two schools and everybody else in the community, Ahearn is an important resource and whatever decision is made, I hope the city's priority is making sure it's a well-kept public space. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Dulce Ferreira, followed by Alejandro Paz, then Elaine DeRosa. Dulce, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Dulce Ferreira, if you can unmute yourself, you do have the floor. We will circle back to Dulce. We're going to go to Alejandro Paz, followed by Elaine DeRosa, then Cynthia Haynes. Alejandro, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Alejandro, you're muted. Oh, you just, there you go.

Thank you. My name is Alejandro Paz and I live at 9 Henry Street. I am speaking in opposition to policy order number five. I want to comment on the proposal to examine requiring off street parking for new housing that has more than four dwelling units. This proposed change would do nothing for our biggest challenges, which are building affordable homes while promoting sustainability. Are these internal combustion machines such an essential part of our city? I say let a property owner decide if they think cars are more valuable than people. Also, why are we trying to mandate parking when such a large percentage of residents in the city already live here happily without off-street parking or cars altogether? I think the city council did the right thing last year when it ended exclusionary zoning and this policy order would set us back. I urge you to vote no on policy order number five.

Thank you. We're going to pause for one moment just so our clerk can get our timer back up. We're going to go to our next speaker, Elaine DeRosa, followed by Cynthia Haynes, then Tina Alou. Elaine, please go ahead.

Thank you. Good evening. My name is Elaine DeRosa. I live at 4 Pleasant Place. I'm testifying in opposition to policy order number 5 and the Brown petition. The implementation of any of these changes would eliminate the continuation of the six to five year impact of the affordable housing overlays preservation and development to date. 16 projects, a thousand homes for families many who were driven from the city because of unaffordable rents. The Cambridge CDD's five-year AHO report, which is on the City Manager's agenda tonight, has clearly documented its success. and projects an additional 300 homes coming this year. Cambridge and the state are facing an affordable housing crisis. Our government and our community should be supporting and celebrating programs that have a positive impact on affordable housing, not dismantling them. Please vote no. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Cynthia Haynes.

Cynthia Haynes, 561 Putnam Ave. I vote for amendments to policy number five because there are no guardrails with development. I live near the demolition site at 270 Sidney Street, which has been tagged asbestos. How did this happen? There are too many developers and not enough staff to provide proper oversight. The asbestos has been exposed for three months. It has been recommended that people avoid walking on the street near the project. But how do we stop the wind from blowing it? A plastic sheet flapping in the wind held down by a bale of hay does not say safety. Adjacent streets are Chestnut, Henry, and Putnam Ave. This is a health threat because a human body cannot remove inhaled asbestos fibers. Fix it immediately.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Tina Alou followed by Dana Bollister. Tina, one minute please.

Good evening, my name is Tina Alou and I live at 113 and a half Pleasant Street. I'm speaking tonight as the director of COC and a long time Cambridge resident. to oppose policy order number five, the Brown petition, and any amendments that would weaken Cambridge's multifamily zoning ordinance. It's striking to me that this policy order is on the same agenda where the five-year report on the affordable housing overlay shows that AHO has become an essential tool in creating new affordable housing. and the Multifamily Housing Ordinance has already put more income restricted affordable homes into the pipeline than Cambridge Inclusionary Zoning has generated in years. But what I must ask is why it is that Cambridge has passed these two major successful pieces of housing legislation in recent years

But a small and loud minority are consistently looking for ways to overturn or water down these policies by creating more hurdles and roadblocks. I encourage the council to oppose any of these efforts which will result in the loss of affordable housing units going forward. Thank you.

Thank you. We're going to go back to Dulce Ferreira. Dulce, you have the floor if you can unmute. One minute.

Hi. Can you hear me?

We can hear you. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you very much for the opportunity. I'm Dulce Ferreira, and I'm the director of the Domestic Violence Sexual Assault Services at the Massachusetts Alliance of Portuguese Speakers, MAPS, at 1046 Cambridge Street. I'm here in support of order number three. MAPS provides critical culturally and linguistically tailored services to survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault in underserved Portuguese-speaking immigrant communities. For more than 50 years, we have worked to build trust and remove language and cultural barriers to assessing services. Current funding cuts threaten the provision of critical services to survivors. as well as progress made to ensure survivors can access the help they need. On behalf of MAPS and the network of Cambridge providers, I urge you to support order number three. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Dana Bullister. Dana has not joined us. We will move on to Alfred Dissidoro, followed by Rebecca Bjork, then Alex Dickel.

And we're having some issues with the timer, but I have a timer on my laptop, so I will stop you at one minute. Thank you.

Alfred Desidoro has not joined. We will go to Rebecca Bjork. Rebecca has not joined. We will go to Alex Dickel. Alex is not in the Zoom. We're going to go to Raquel Eskrich. Raquel, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Hello?

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can. Please go ahead. Okay.

Good evening, everyone, and thank you for allowing me to speak. I am here today because I strongly support the creation of the synthetic soccer field in Cambridge. This project is about much more than a field. It is about giving our children a safe and accessible place to play, grow, and be part of their community. Many families in our neighborhood do not have easy transportation, like me. For some of us, getting to other fields such as Dunahee Park can be difficult and time consuming, especially without the car. As a result, many children miss opportunities to participate in sports and healthy outdoor activities. Every child deserves the chance to play close to home.

A local synthetic field would provide a reliable space for recreation, exercise, teamwork, and community connection. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Marina Garo-Atlas, followed by Juan Mendez, then Martha Kingsbury. Marina, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi there, Marina Gurro-Atlas of 37 Pleasant Street in strong support of PO number three, PO number five, the Brown petition, and in opposition to CMA 2026-174. PO number three is an essential service PO number 5 supports de minimis urban public health through sufficient living space, environmental health, and safety. It allows open space, protects trees as critical public health infrastructure, and U.S. EPA tells us a well-placed west-facing tree saves over 30% of home energy bills. and this is impossible without setbacks. Cambridge needs to invest in healthy livable pro-social spaces from green space to air quality, shade trees, sunlight access, infrastructure and benefits from stormwater mitigation to excess heat mitigation. Most Deadly Weather Condition. And I'd be remiss to say as an environmental health professional and PFAS researcher that ChemTurf is healthy or safe. It harms children's health and this is preventable and it's linked with glioblastoma.

Thank you very much and I urge you to reject pollution from rigorous hazardous waste contaminants to violation of water quality permits and oppose any boondogs.

Thank you. Thanks, Marina. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Juan Mendez followed by Martha Kingsbury. Juan? Juan has not joined. We're going to go to Martha Kingsbury.

I'm Martha Kingsbury. I live at 341 Hurley Street, near 6th Street and Hurley. So I'm right across the street from Ahern Field. I can't believe in 2026 we're still arguing about the blessings of plastic, that we don't understand what plastic itself is doing to us, to our environment. How we all live with microplastics in our body. I don't understand why people who like sports think that playing on plastic is a good idea. It's killing us. It's ruining us. It's killing our oceans. It's killing our earth. And yet we're here trying to argue that the idea of putting plastic grass in Ahern Field is a good idea?

I have to say I've been listening to people all night long and I'm just astonished. I'm astonished by the people who think this is the way that our kids are going to be able to play. Thank you, Martha.

Your time has expired. Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Abigail Ransmeier, followed by John Pitkin, then Ed Henley. Abigail, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

My name is Abigail Ransmeier. I live at Ellery Square. I am in favor of policy order five. This is a yes and situation. Cambridge is nobly progressive on housing, but let's be progressive on even more fronts. Let's use this moment to encourage long-term health and climate resiliency. As an architect and educator, I advocate to shape our ordinance with design standards that bring more people along. Let's write zoning standards that thoughtfully return open spaces to the ground plane, increase setbacks and stepbacks. These are not aesthetic whims. This is not about brick and metal siding. It is about codifying the outdoor connections, vegetation, and slices of sky we subsequently consciously share and all benefit from. Developers enable the housing density we need. They're important. But open space design standards won't block new housing in Cambridge.

Instead, it might galvanize a culture of residents and developers collaborating to build interconnected, socially and environmentally resilient Cambridge for today and for tomorrow.

Thank you. Our next speaker is John Pitkin, followed by Ed Henley, then Jim Gray. John, you have the floor. You have one minute. Please go ahead. John, we cannot hear you.

Sorry, I had a phone going off in the background. John Pitkin, 18 Fayette Street, speaking in favor of policy order number five and the Brown petition. I want to thank Councilor Zusy and Doug Brown for putting these ideas forward. They need consideration. Neighborhood housing is housing for people of all families and people of all ages 12 months out of the year. What we're getting in mid-Cambridge, what's been proposed under this ordinance, and there have been four projects that are shown, is not that. We do accommodate some transient housing and temporary housing for people for basically postgraduate early career housing for folks in that stage of the life cycle. We already have a lot of that in mid-Cambridge. Too much of it Destroyers that will destroy our neighborhood. There needs to be a balance. I support this petition.

Let's build the kind of housing people can live in 12 months a year throughout their lives. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Ed Henley, followed by Jim Gray, then Dan Totten. Ed, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Ed Henley. Can you hear me?

We can. Please go ahead.

I live at 237 Franklin Street, Manning Apartments, Senior Housing. I'm speaking for policy five to get the zoning right. The change that we need to make as a community in Cambridge at Massachusetts with regards to the needed housing is fairly obvious. Most everyone is on board with that, but sometimes unexpected related issues can be the consequence and we need to figure it out going forward. Let's not pit neighbor against neighbor or issue against issue. If it takes stopping and reconfiguring how to get the development we want, let's think that through now and do it right. Slow and steady wins the race. Please take the time, approve policy order number five. Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture as we try to move forward with more affordable style housing.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jim Gray followed by Dan Totten. I don't see Jim Gray. We're going to move on to Dan Totten, followed by Adriana Hausman. Dan?

Hi. Dan Totten, 54, Bishop Allen Drive. A lot on the agenda. I wanted to talk about the federal stabilization fund and just kind of put it out there that that I believe, unless I'm mistaken, that money was originally intended to backstop the 128 households that are receiving federal money to get off the street and get housing. and I don't really know exactly what's going on with this other thing and I believe sincerely that There's a need for money in whatever's happening, but I wanna make sure that this, again, unless I'm mixing things up, that that is part of this conversation, that what happens if and when that gets cut, because I've seen some housing authorities it seems like that have been cut this month.

So I just want to make sure that they're taken care of. Thanks.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Adriana Hausman. Adriana, one minute, please.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Great, so I am Adriana Cohen-Hausman. I am a Cambridge parent. I am also a pediatrician and a parent of multiple Cambridge youth soccer kids. So I urge the City, the Council, to pause the Ahern Field Turf Project until there's been independent evidence-based comparison that includes modern grass natural alternatives. My concern is that children's health and environmental resilience. Artificial turf can become exceedingly hotter than natural grass. Thank you for joining us today.

These concerns are especially important when we talk about East Cambridge as East Cambridge has fewer green spaces than other city areas and turf gets exceedingly hot during the summer temperatures. Thank you.

Please email the remainder of your comment. Our next speaker is Irene Kang, followed by Clark Jacobson, then Amy Waltz. Irene.

Hi, my name is Irene Kong. I live at 113 7th Street, Apartment 2 in East Cambridge. I'm here to oppose artificial turf at Ahern Field and to urge the Council to demand an inclusive Decision-making process. As a former varsity soccer player and mother of a CSUS student who played soccer, I value sports. But Ahern Field is next to a school and serves diverse community needs. The city claimed they did community engagement, yet the turf decision was made before any community meetings, and concerns have been ignored. In absence of a city-led effort to gather broader input, local advocates launched an independent, neutral survey. The results are telling. An overwhelming 87% preferred natural grass. Every single local neighborhood parent surveyed preferred grass. Everyone who preferred turf either lives outside the neighborhood or does not currently have kids. This has been exhibited this evening as most of the speakers in favor of turf are CYS and sports board members and coaches who live in other parts of Cambridge and do not represent

Thank you, Irene. Your time is up.

Please email the remainder. Our next speaker is Clark Jacobson, followed by Amy Walz. Clark is not with us. We're going to go to Amy. Amy, if you can unmute yourself, please go ahead. One minute. Amy, you're still muted. We will try to come back to Amy at the end. Our next speaker is Kathleen Higgins, followed by Conrad Crawford, the NOAA staff. Kathleen, you have the floor. You have one minute. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Can you hear me?

We can.

My name is Kathy Higgins. I live at 345 Norfolk Street. I oppose policy order number five and the Brown zoning petition. Together, they will eviscerate the multifamily zoning ordinance. with amendments that would cripple housing for affordable projects, including those built with the AHL. CDG has a full plate moving Cambridge forward for its residents. It should not be moving backward to revisit what has already been thoroughly vetted and accepted. Placing all kinds of restrictions on what can be built means no housing will be built. For decades we have not been building what we need. And rather than being the result of multifamily housing zoning, displacement was rampant before multifamily housing zoning reversed the incentives. As Carolyn Fuller said very well, this is a well-financed minority seeking to undo the will of the people who have clearly voted for the city to move in the direction of more affordable housing. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Conrad Crawford, followed by Noah Stapp. Conrad, please go ahead. You have one minute.

Thank you. Thank you, Council. And thank you to everybody from East Cambridge and the rest of the city that has spoken in favor of keeping the field at Ahern as grass. I would like to speak to Ahern Field in the context of other green spaces that are identified in the city's analysis report. and look closely at the sites that are located in East Cambridge and designated as green. Hurley Field or Hurley Park is hardscape. Silva Park is hardscape. Moderna, which is presented as a privately owned public open space, is half fenced off and designed in a way that does not support recreation or even passive recreation. I would also like to point to the city reports and specifically the urban heat island technical report which identified Fulkerson at Charles Street as one of the hottest parts of the city. and Turffield will exacerbate that heat.

I would also like to mention that I was a participant in the Urban Forest Master Plan and the Climate Resolution.

Thanks, Conrad. Please email us the remainder. Our next speaker is Noah Stapp. Noah, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Noah, you're muted if you can unmute yourself. We will come back to Noah at the end. Our next speaker is Maureen Foley, followed by Katherine Rose, then Paula Phipps. Maureen Foley is not on the Zoom. We will go to Catherine Rose. Catherine Rose has not joined. We're going to go to Paula Phipps. Paula, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Paula Phipps, if you can unmute yourself, there you go.

Okay, thank you.

I've lived three blocks from a hern field for almost 25 years and I have many concerns about the turf grass proposal. First of all, the safety, the health impacts due to microplastics, toxic chemicals, and thank you to somebody for including endocrine disruptors. People do not understand the long-term impacts these will have on youth. Injuries on hot turf grass are well documented. The second point is the heat generation. Temperature increase with turf grass installed is 35 to 55 degrees higher. If you try to find out Fahrenheit, If you try to find out about cooling turf grass, the expense is enormous to keep it as cool as a natural grass field would be. So some sort of cost analysis should probably be done.

Water infiltration is really important, and with natural fields.

Thank you, Paula. Please email us the remainder. Our next speaker is Denaria Maldonado, followed by Tunke Gunluck. Denaria? Denari is not with us. We're going to go to Tuncay Gunluk. You have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hello. My name is Tuncay Gunluk, and I'm at 27 Kelly Road. I'm here to support policy number five. My observation is that the upzoning as is is either creating luxury housing or damaging the family-friendly nature of Cambridge. I have two examples. One of them is the giant hole on Hay Street right next to MLK. A triple deck is turned down. A big old tree is knocked down. A yard is gone. Nine unit rectangular condo building is built right up to the property line without parking. It's advertised as bike friendly. You cannot raise a family in New England on a bike. Raising a family needs adequate parking. It's driving the families away from Cambridge to suburbs. Another example is the 19 Kelly Road, which has improved to be a house worth over $3 million.

These are not affordable. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Heather Hoffman, followed by Mary Quang, then Justin Safe. We have a handful of folks who have joined us since we passed their names, so we'll try to pick those folks up at the end. Next up is Heather. Heather, you have the floor. Please go ahead. One minute.

Hello, Heather Hoffman, 213 Hurley Street. With respect to the Brown petition, I assume you will do what you're supposed to do and advance it to hearing. With respect to the Flaherty and Zusy proposal, I guess I'm not surprised that people are terrified that anything might be studied to see if it actually works as advertised. It was never, ever intended to produce affordable housing. That's just what they told you. Read the petitions. With respect to Ahern Field, East Cambridge has been asking for athletic fields for decades. The city decided that we should not have the seven and a half acre park at the Whoopi Center that we were promised for 20 years.

Why is that? The city will never provide us with proper athletic facilities.

Thank you, Heather. Your time has expired. Our next speaker is Mary Kwong. Mary, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, great. Good evening, Councilors. My name is Mary Kwong, and I'm a resident of the Riverside neighborhood. I am speaking today to urge the City Council to reconsider our current family zoning projects policy, specifically through the lens of street safety and public infrastructure. I am seeing building permits, architectural plans to build six-story buildings with no parking next to our schools, including CRLS, came open and a residential lot next to the Martin Luther King being sold highlighting its right by right conversion to a six-story building. Taking away parking for a 53-unit building with no parking required for this new building Given Cambridge's existing parking shortages,

Adding high density housing without adequate parking forces vehicles to circle around blocks and endlessly creating hazardous conditions for students, children, and pedestrians.

Thanks, Mary. That's your time. Please email us the rest. Our next speaker is Justin Safe. Justin, you have one minute. Please go ahead. Justin, you're unmuted. You have the floor.

Hi, Justin Singh. Housing opponents either do not know what their own package tonight would do, claiming it will have this impact when it will have massive impact, or they do know and they don't care. Neither is a good look, and their action suggests it's the latter. Our nonprofit affordable housing provider, HRI, informed you tonight. And just to start, members of the Affordable Housing Trust have confirmed that they were not consulted about this package. If you truly cared about affordable housing in Cambridge, wouldn't you reach out to those experts? Those behind these vague petitions have dropped the mask revealing they do not care about housing affordability. Make no mistake, they support a full return to residential segregation. As we see in today's report on the 100% affordable housing overlay, we've got more than 1,000 affordable homes in the pipeline. This package would decimate those numbers. A recent AHO project reported parking spots costed $300,000 apiece. cannot impose millions of dollars of parking costs and claim to care about housing affordability. And these amendments will also deter affordable inclusionary housing and social housing. CDD has projected multifamily zoning will create 660 affordable inclusionary homes.

The petition proponents, meanwhile, have been spending months attempting to block inclusionary homes from West Cambridge. There are lots of ways you can...

Thanks, Justin. Please email us the remainder. Next up we have Alex Dickel, followed by Amy Waltz, then Noah Stapp. Alex, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Alex Dickle. I live at 41 Burns. I'm speaking on policy order number five. It's the start of a clear backdoor approach to undoing major portions of last year's multifamily housing ordinance. First, though, I'd like to point out that one of the sponsors of this bill less than a month ago sat in his chair saying this council should respect the previous council's decisions. While I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance, perhaps this council should be consistent on applying their strange interpretation of how a council should work. More importantly though, this policy order is an act of political theater. To vote yes would waste city staff time and resources that could be better used to figure out how to update our infrastructure to support our inevitable population growth. This PO asks the city to examine, excuse me, instead of arguing for setbacks, we should be letting narrow, Excuse me. We should be narrowing our streets and providing public green space, not private. Instead of pushing our affordable units to unpleasant to live in main thoroughfares,

Let's restrict the transformation of two and three family buildings into giant single family homes that cater only to your wealthy campaign donors. Let's give the new zoning time to work. Please vote no on this PO.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Amy Waltz. Amy, if you can unmute yourself, you have one minute. Amy, you're unmuted, but we don't hear you.

Hi. Hi. Housing, sorry, climate and environmental impacts are extremely urgent and irreversible changes are already in progress. The Zero Waste Master Plan was approved a year ago, yet it does not go into effect until it is finalized. This plan is a win for residents, a win for the city, and a win for the environment and climate. Please pass this tonight so Cambridge can move forward this summer. Secondly, grass on O'Hearn is important for numerous environmental reasons and health. in increased heat. Additionally, housing should be pursued in concert with best environment and climate practices. Revision and zoning are essential for best results, especially concerning unlimited demolition and construction.

There are ways to pursue housing that don't also impact the environment and climate so

Thanks, Amy. Please email us the rest. Our final speaker is Noah Stapp. Noah, you have one minute. Please go ahead.

Hello, Noah Stapp, 84 Prescott Street. Speaking about policy order number five, I do not see how increasing regulation and rolling back many of the will benefit from affordable housing in any way. I think it is apparent that this proposal is designed to return Cambridge to its former status as one of the most underbuilt cities in the nation. and continue to make it a city for the wealthy rather than the city for the many people who work at its businesses, support its economy and make it a vibrant community and not just a wealthy landowner's enclave. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Mayor, that is all 150 people that were signed up to speak.

Thank you, Naomi, for ushering us through. So that concludes public comment. Vice Mayor Azeem makes a motion to close public comment. All those in favor say aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. There's no submission of the record. There's no reconsiderations. And before we get to the city managers, I want to take a moment to just remind the body about the amendments to our city council rules that we adopted last week. First, we now have a stated end time at 10 p.m. This gives us today under two hours to get through the agenda, so we'll need to move efficiently. If we do reach 10 and haven't concluded our business, We can either recess or suspend the rules in order to continue and finish tonight. Second, the new rules also place limits on floor time

each councillor may have the floor up to two times per agenda item and each time you have the floor you may ask up to two questions to city staff additionally when you have the floor you may speak up for speak for up to five minutes and I want to be clear that the staff responses count within that five minute window, not separately. To help everyone manage their time, we'll be using a clock that will count down from five minutes. When time runs out, the alarm will go off and I'll be asking you to wrap up your comment. and I asked for everyone's cooperation in moving things along and so we'll see how that goes. With that, let's get started. We are at the city manager's agenda. What is the pleasure of the council? Madam Mayor. Councilor Al-Zubi.

I'd like to pull number 11.

Councilor Al-Zubi pulls number 11. I know others wanted to pull number 11 as well. Councilor Simmons.

Three.

Number three.

Yes.

I do not see anyone. Yes, Councilor McGovern.

Seven.

Seven? Seven. Okay. So we've pulled number three, seven, and eleven. And we will do a roll call on city manager's agenda items number one. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10.

Move to approve the balance.

On a motion by Councilor Simmons.

Councilor Al-Zubi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azeem. Yes, Councilor Flaherty. Yes. Yes, Councilor McGovern. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan is absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Councilor Zusy? Yes. Yes. Mayor Siddiqui? Yes. Yes. And you have eight members recorded in the affirmative and one recorded as absent.

The city manager agenda item balance is approved. We'll go to city manager agenda item number three. This is a communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang. City Manager, relative to response to awaiting report items 26-39, relative to preparations for the city's LGBTQ plus pride celebrations on June 20th. Councilor Simmons.

Thank you, Madam Chair, through you to the city manager. I was just reading your memo related to the city's LGBTQ plus pride celebration. Thank you for this outline. It's very helpful. One curiosity I have, it does speak about the short film The Dads Will Be Inside. City Hall, but it doesn't make any mention of the presentation of the Bayard Rustin breakfast. And so I was just trying to get a Bayard Rustin presentation, excuse me, I always say breakfast because there is a Bayard Rustin breakfast. There's a number of people. Let me just say this. The Bayard Rustin Committee has met and they are going to be the Pride Committee members. have met, and I believe the awardee for this year is Harold Cox. Many of you may know Harold Cox. He was the former chief public health Officer for the City of Cambridge for over a decade.

He's gone on to do many, many other things since then, but it's very good to see this gentleman coming back to the city in this way by being acknowledged. I know that the Pride events tend to be outside as more of a party. That doesn't always lend itself to presentation, so I'm just curious. If there's someone here that can speak to it, otherwise I will gladly receive it by email of run of the show so that I can inform those that want to come and support and acknowledge Mr. Cox. And he gets this presentation. What to expect?

Through you, Mayor Siddiqui. Executive Director Gregory, I believe, is online. And I think she can give you a response. Councilor Simmons. Excellent.

ED Gregory, if you want to turn on your camera and mic, you've been promoted to respond.

Good evening. Through you, Madam Mayor, if you can repeat the question. I'm so sorry. I've been online, but the internet is a little choppy. Question.

No worries. Through the chair to Ms. Gregory. I was looking over and acknowledged the city manager for sending us this update on the pride celebration that's going to be on January 20th. It does lay out several things that are going to be happening. It does not mention the presentation of the Bayard Rustin Award. I'm trying to get a sense because the number of people I've become aware that Harold Cox, our former chief public health officer, will be receiving the award, but I don't know how or where to direct them. It's a big party on the street, and that's lovely. But it sometimes makes it hard for the presentation, doesn't lift it to the dignity that I think it certainly deserves. So I just wanted to hear from someone, is that going to be before or after The short film The Dads, how does the commission see that happening?

Thank you so much. The awards and all speaking portions of the event will take place at 1130 a.m. I have been in communication with Professor Cox and all of the other awardees. They too have accepted that they will be present, including Professor Papp. They have been invited to be on the stage by 11.15 a.m. and in place for your remarks as well as Mayor Siddiqui's in the presentation of all the awards.

To you, Madam Chair, to Ms. Gregory, because I don't know where the stage is. Is it going to be a stage in the City Hall or is it going to be on the... Sorry, you're fine. So that'd be helpful because, again, people are very excited about this acknowledgement and the number of people. I think you, Ms. Watkins, may be a member, Harold Cox. So there's a number of us that know and says, well, where's it going to be held? And so I'm just trying to properly... Direct people. So is it going to be outside in the street? If it is outside in the street, will we be able to hear? Because the music will have stopped playing. I'm just trying to get a sense of how that's going to happen.

Through you, Madam Mayor, the event will begin with just music playing and all the events access and open. At 11.30, the music will stop and again, the speaking portion will begin. The stage will be on Inman Street right below Dottie Doyle Way and this information is being shared with the awardees and if I can also put this in an email to council so they can you can share it with anyone you would like to as well.

Thank you.

Through you, Madam Chair. That's time, Councilor Simmons. You can wrap up.

I just wanted to say, can we get that in writing?

And yeah, I think I just got the run of show, so I'll make sure you have that. You'll be presenting that award.

Thank you. I yield the floor.

Any other questions? Hearing none, we'll go ahead on Councilor Simmons' motion to place this item on file. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. City Manager. Agenda item number three is placed on file. Welcome to City Manager agenda item number seven. This is a communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to a five-year progress review of the affordable housing overlay. Councilor McGovern, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, through you, I just wanted to... I'm not used to being timed. I just wanted to bring this forward. There's obviously a lot of discussion tonight with policy order number five and the Brown petition. There's been a lot of talk around about the AHO. and I just thought that this was important to bring forward for a couple reasons. One, to clarify that the affordable housing overlay and multifamily housing are two different things with two different purposes, two different sets of tools to address our housing crisis. The overlay, which was passed, it'll be six years in October, right? Six or seven, six, I think, was designed to... Make it easier for affordable housing developers, and by affordable in this case, I mean 100% subsidized low-income housing.

made it easier for those developers to be able to buy property that they were previously unable to purchase because they were being outbid by for-profit developers. It has worked. HRI, Just a Start, the Housing Authority, and even some new affordable housing developers in the city have more property now than they have ever had before. and that is all turning itself into 100% low income housing. That is different from the multifamily housing ordinance whose primary focus was on increasing the housing stock overall of which some would be low income through inclusionary and we can talk about that later. They are two distinct things. Many of us were at 52 New Street today. It was the first approved affordable housing project five years ago, and it just opened. 106 units.

Hundreds of people, family size units too, that are going to I get to live and stay in Cambridge because of the overlay. And when I hear people say the overlay is not working or the The Height is Too Much, or this, that, and the other thing. I would just encourage folks to sit with some of the people that I sit with, Councilor Simmons sits with, Al-Zubi sits with, most of us sit with, who benefit from those units. Because it's not just about the building itself, it's about what the building provides. And we heard today from a woman who told her story of coming here from Haiti with, at the time, an eight-year-old child, pregnant. Her husband was in France and was gonna join her here. He died. She found herself in a country alone with two kids.

and facing losing her housing and is now in this building, beautiful new building under the affordable housing overlay. The lives of those kids are 100% better. The life of that woman is 100% better. That's what this does. in any attempt to undermine it or make it more difficult to build or to prioritize things above, people having an affordable roof over their head is not I don't know if you want to comment on it, but we have over a thousand homes for low-income people in the city because of the overlay. The fact that they're not happening fast enough, I agree. I wish we could snap our fingers and have them happen tomorrow. But that's not the overlays problem. That's the funding problem. That's because these developers have to jump through so many hoops to get funding to build affordable housing. That's not the overlays fault. So Mr. Cotter, a minute. Can you talk a little bit about this report?

Speed Talk, Don't Breathe.

Thank you. Through you, Mayor Siddiqui. Yes, so we're happy to provide the five-year report on the AHO and note that it's been McGovern, very successful in creating a very deep pipeline of new affordable housing. And by affordable housing we mean, as you said, Councilor McGovern, 100% affordable housing where every unit is affordable. You noted we celebrated today the opening of 106-affordable units created through the overlay. It has been very successful. More than 1,000 units are now complete or in the pipeline. I believe there's more than 400 units that are under construction. We'll be seeing many more units coming online in the coming months and more AHL projects coming into the pipeline New sites are required in advance through the AHO.

I'll yield my 10 seconds.

Thank you, Councilor McGovern. I know that we have Councilor Zusy who'd like to speak. Anyone else who'd like to speak before I go back to Councilor Zusy? Okay, so Councilor Zusy, please go ahead.

I just wanted to say congratulations to the city and to the housing department. I think the five-year report is very impressive, that there are 16 projects in the pipeline is amazing. A thousand units built, 300 more coming. I think that's extraordinary. And I just hope people realize that when Councilor Flaherty and I are proposing amendments that will improve the multifamily housing ordinance. Our goal in doing that was not to impact Yeah, the eight show.

Not officially before us, so just keep it to the report.

Anyway, great job. Great job. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Councilor Zusy. We will go to Councilor Simmons.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I, too, just wanted to State, how thrilled I was that we are telling this story. We should have a press conference. And you smile, but I'm very serious. People do not realize the amount of work, how hard we have worked. to make these homes, these permanently affordable homes, available to so many Cambridge citizens. And that's something that's important and should be said over and over again. I hope we do find a way. to really through town hall meetings or take our show on the road just to demonstrate the great work that we're doing. I don't know what other cities and towns are doing. That is equal to this. I mean, in the port alone, there's close to 100 units. I live in the port. It's wonderful to see I can't think of the Cherry Street being developed. Or it says Broadway Park. Threw me totally off. It's the parking lot. on Broadway Street. It took me a little while to figure it out.

But I'm very pleased because we talked about this for a very long time and could not get it done. And through these amendments, we have a wonderful story to tell. And so you're right. Thank you. McGovern for just informing people, and maybe it's worth saying over and over again, what is and what is not. So I would just say we have to be much better at telling the story more often and as far and as wise we can so people understand. that if we're going to have affordability, we have to be deliberate, we have to be thoughtful, we have to be focused on doing it. And we're all not going to get everything we want. But if we are really committed to making sure that Cambridge has a diverse population, these are the things that we have to do more often. So thanks for all the work that everyone has done, including my colleagues, present and past, that have weighed in to make this possible. I yield the floor.

Thank you, Councilor Simmons. Anyone else? And I'll just say briefly, and you can time me too, is that in 2015, as the report says, there were only two active new affordable housing projects And now in 2026, there's 16 developments that are underway that will produce over more than 1,000 new homes. So it is remarkable. Simmons, and I were co-chairs of the housing committee. McGovern was mayor, we didn't have the votes, right? And we kept at it, and thankfully we had Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler join us in 2020. We were able to get the votes we needed, but

you know it was a it took a long long time and so it is remarkable and it was great to be there today so I hope that we can have further discussions about that progress. Four minutes left. So we're good. Anyone else who would like to talk on this? Hearing none, on a motion by Councilor McGovern to place this communication on file, city manager agenda item number seven. All those in favor say aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. That is placed on file. We'll move to city manager agenda item number 11. A communication transmitted from Yi-An Huang, City Manager, relative to awaiting report item number 26-25 regarding a report on how the decision to install Artificial Turf was made. This was pulled by Councilor Al-Zubi and then I have Councilor Zusy. And the action here today, if it's the will of the body, is to place this on file.

I just want to remind folks about that up front. I have Councilor Al-Zubi, Councilor Zusy, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, and then Councilor Flaherty.

Thank you, through you Madam Mayor. I got a lot to say so I'm gonna try to run through this as fast as I can. I've got two questions. First, can you help me understand what the maintenance costs are? I didn't really see that in the report and I understand that's one of the biggest points in this conversation. So curious to hear a little bit more about how the maintenance costs have been over the past few years on the field.

I can start because I think there's a high level response and then if there's specifics. In the report we talk about I think there's a number we've included about $36,000 for average annual maintenance on a grass field. That does not include the water, so there is also and depending on the year that can range between 300,000 gallons to over a million gallons of water in terms of irrigation. So that cost is not included in that. The annual cost in terms of maintaining the synthetic turf field is about $5,000 per year. Those are the maintenance costs, I would say. The more significant cost is the construction cost, but the maintenance cost is about $36,000 plus the water versus $5,000 on an annual basis.

Thank you for that info and I did appreciate that the report tried to address concerns around weather like flooding or heat and then we had microplastics in there but I didn't see much data there though that was a little sad to see So are you able to help me understand why there isn't more information or data on this? I even looked to see if the word flood was mentioned and it wasn't. So I'd be curious to hear a little bit more about that.

So through you, Mayor Siddiqui, in terms of microplastics, that is very much evolving. and so there isn't a lot of data so a lot of the data that you will see on microplastics is really includes information about crumb rubber and one of the things that I think is really important to understand is just to take a little bit of a step back in terms of how we got to this decision and part of it was about you know needing to support the uses of the field and also you know trying to balance those environmental concerns and so every time we've done you know replaced an artificial turf field or done a new field, we've continued to update those specifications. And so we no longer use the crumb rubber. It uses a natural infill, which reduces the heat. versus the traditional crumb rubber that you've seen. And similarly with the microplastics and others, we're continuing to look at those kinds of details to again continue to reduce those concerns as we can.

Gotcha. Thank you. That's helpful to know, although I really do think that the environmental concerns are really valuable to think through, and I know I was recently talking to the Office of Sustainability around the extreme heat protocol, and just considering that artificial turf, like the heat is a lot higher, upwards of 170 degrees Fahrenheit, one suggestion I have is that we include TURFS as a part of the extreme heat protocol because we're going to have a lot of kids who need to take more breaks and hydrate outside of just the conversation on this field right now. From what I heard from public comment at the end of the day, It feels like a question about how we can increase the usage of these fields for our sports. And I understand that. I think that's a very valid point. And I support it. I love sports. I love the power of it.

I've spent so many years in the sports world doing work to do that because I think we need more young people playing sports, whether it's for interpersonal skills, intrapersonal skills, mentorship, discipline. I mean, what you get out of sports is beautiful. And at the same time I'm like holding this trade off of the reality of it not being an athletic field. That not everyone is an athlete who uses that field. Turf, on the other hand, has a lot of downsides from different perspectives. I mentioned the environment. From the heat perspective, plastics, maybe we don't know as much. Flood didn't come up. but also from an injury susceptibility perspective when you're playing on an artificial turf you actually get more grip and that lends itself potentially more ACL injuries, hamstring injuries MCL, Meniscus. I mean, I say this as someone who's played on a lot of artificial turf. And then the one other thing that I want to mention is the amount of time I've played on artificial turf, you can see the heat radiating off the turf.

To the point where I think you could probably bring a skillet and cook an egg. And according to the state of Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services, AFT, like artificial turf users, should be limiting the amount of time that they use the field, especially when it's exceeding temperatures above 120 degrees Fahrenheit. So when you're thinking about it, We want to build equity so that we can improve youth access to sports, but we also have climate change. So when we do this change, and then in the future we need to go to grass fields because it's too hot, we're putting ourselves in a very interesting situation. I'll yield for...

And as a reminder, we can come back on this discussion to you at the end. Well, go ahead. Right now I have in the roster Councilor Zusy and then Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Flaherty, and then Councilor McGovern. Councilor Zusy, you have the floor.

Thank you so much. I was incredibly, I've met with the pro-turf, the progress groups actually several times. and I'm impressed with both groups passion and all the reasons like there are lots and lots of pros and cons to each. Each wants joy, each wants interaction, each wants society, both groups want the same thing. But, you know, I'll tell you, I was in East Cambridge this weekend, and I was biking by, I biked by Ahern Field twice, and I think what really impressed me was It's beside an elementary school and it's in a very dense residential neighborhood. That's why I think... Putting in a plastic field there is so weird. Like it's one thing to put it at Danahy, which is a trash mountain, But it's another thing to put it in a neighborhood where there's very little open space to put a plastic carpet.

And I agree with the neighbors. Again, I want kids playing soccer. And I wonder if we could have the turf field, could it be at Gold Star Mothers Park? That's another possibility. We're going to be redoing that already. Why not keep a hern field open and grass and put the turf elsewhere. I'm impressed that over 2,000 people have signed a petition saying they really want grass versus 400 for turf. I'm impressed with the lack of formal community process that there was relating to this. I feel like we should learn from this experience. I feel as though too often the city because we have so many different problems to manage or challenges to manage.

Sometimes we're paternalistic and we make decisions, what we think are the best decisions for the community. I really believe in the wisdom and intelligence and thoughtfulness of our residents. I think we should have started with that process and then come to a conclusion. Rather than sort of deciding what would be best for the people. I think in this case, I think we're recommending the wrong decision. I feel like in 10 years we will certainly not want a turf field at Ahern because it's going to be way too hot and it's going to be flooding way too much. But once you turn a grass field to a turf field, I understand that it's sort of hard to go backwards. So I worry about that as well. Again, I think it would be better to think about putting the turf elsewhere. So I wanted to ask a few questions in my two minutes.

One, the East Cambridge planning team wrote an excellent letter about this. And they asked, how about exploring unconventional locations for a turf field, garage rooftops, leased institutional space, covered bubble structures? I wondered if you had done that. And I also want to hear more about maintenance, because I understand there's an issue Are we really aerating and seeding all our fields like in a thoughtful way? I know you are at Magazine Beach and I really appreciate that. But then also parents have been asking me about the synthetic fields. Are they sterilized? How is the infill tested? What are we doing currently to maintain the turf fields? So through you, Mayor Siddiqui, to our panel.

Sure. Through you, Mayor Siddiqui, I will try to, because in our one minute, I'm not sure our whole panel can address these issues. So let me start and try. So the testing, there is regular testing done multiple times a year. at the turf fields for the compaction and the sort of the bounce. And there's a technical term for that that Adam could spend a Many minutes talking about, but they are tested regularly and that is how we monitor the fields and determine when they actually need to be replaced. So that is something that happens regularly. In terms of the maintenance of our grass fields, we absolutely reseed, aerate, irrigate, What we do not do is close them down for regular periods of time. So if you really want a grass field to be successful and to be able to look better and have grass and not get as run down as their grass fields do, in addition to all those practices that DPW actively does, you would also need to close them down for extended periods of time.

And one of the challenges is that You want to close them down in the spring and the fall when the grass can really grow, which is the exact same peak time as air use sports are using those fields.

We can come back to your second round, Councillor Zusy. We'll go to Councillor Flaherty.

Through you, Madam Mayor. I've got a couple of quick questions, but I also want to say that I really appreciate Rachel Henke's comments tonight. She's the mother of the kid who pitched a fantastic game against BC High last Saturday, and they beat the number one seed in the state. and I'm a BC High grad and it was spectacular to be there and see these kids that I've known for the better part of a decade through coaching and West Cambridge and St. Peter CYO and just see them compete at the highest levels in the joy they exhibited and the closeness of them and they're playing tomorrow in Lynn. I expect to see all of you there. If you need a ride, I'll give you a ride. So my question is, we heard from a lot of people in East Cambridge, just like everybody did, I have, and there were some failures in the community outreach. I guess.

And is there a way, is there a mechanism we can employ our communication strategies that we've talked about in this chamber? like text messaging to that neighborhood to really identify people who are concerned about what's happening and get their responses or at least give them an alert. That's number one. Number two, has there been some thought I'm sure there will be some heat on the turf. I've been on turf on hot days. I know what it's like. and, oh yeah, finally on the report, I saw percentages of use and how we can include or increase the number of hours of use. And I know that the central component of using a Huron field is for youth athletics.

Many, many years ago, I played softball on that field, and it was in horrible condition then. And from what I can see, I haven't played on it many, many years. It looks to be in horrible condition. Is there an estimate of the passive use as compared to the active use of organized play or just kids using the field in that way? So those are my three questions. I'm sorry to rush through it, but we'll get our timer right there.

We split the time. We'll do great. And again, I'll start. I'd say that in terms of usage, one of the things that's important is we focus a lot on sort of the Programmed usage in terms of youth sports, but one of the things that is challenging about a Hearn Field is that it provides, it is active basically all day long between the school, between daycares, between neighborhood folks using it. and the youth programs. And so there are a lot of different uses that take place over all day long and evening. One of the things that I think is also important is to remember that this is the entire complex of the it's not just the field like we're really focused here today on the field but it also includes the other playground areas other open space areas around the the school The plan does include planting 34 additional trees. And so there are a lot of other elements besides just the turf field. So I think that's important.

I also think when you talk about the heat, and this goes back to what Councilor Al-Zubi brought up as well, you know this year we've really tried to formalize our heat protocol and it's the first year I think we're trying to take it to the next level have a more organized response to heat events and one of those is coordinating with you know sports and thinking about and this is for all fields and so it's not just about the turf fields because I think you know people are saying like oh I played on turf fields before and you know a lot of those are crumb rubber and so this will be less hot than that still hotter than grass since we want to be really clear about that but you know when we look at those strategies thinking about when are the game times making sure that we're including water stations in parks so people have easy access to water, adjusting the game length, making sure there's nearby shaded areas, that's where I talk about

Thank you for joining us. when we're declaring saying it is a heat emergency is an opportunity for people to really step back and say, what do we need to do to make sure that the kids are safe? and one of the things I think is important is that again the sort of the busiest time for programmed youth activities is really the spring and the fall and then for the school it's really through the school year and so You're balancing like, yes, we can play more of it on, use it more during rainy, wet days, but there may be hot days where we don't use it. Again, all of these things are about trade-offs and we've tried to be really clear that we don't see any of this as like there's this perfect answer. And in terms of outreach, we will continue to try to make improvements. How's that?

We will come back to you, Councilor Flaherty. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler.

Thanks, Mayor Siddiqui. Through you, folks have made good points about the science and personal impacts on this, so I just wanted to talk a bit about my experience with the project. This topic first came to my attention in May 2025 when there was a line item for Ahern Field improvements that showed up in the city budget with the city manager requesting $7.5 million. and it wasn't clear at that time what the budget line meant because there had not been any city council conversations about putting turf funding here at Herne Field before May 2025 and I don't think there had been any public forums about it either. If I'm wrong about that and there was a council meeting or a public meeting in East Cambridge before May 2025, please let me know. But I noticed that. at a time when the city staff and council were spending a lot of time talking about the need to reduce city spending because of the economic outlook. So on May 14th, 2025 at 1237 p.m., I sent an email to city manager and staff saying, I hope you're doing well.

Nolan, Siddiqui, and myself had a number of questions about the proposed $7.5 million funding allocation for Ahern Field in the current budget. In the spirit of conversations about the council not approving funding requests that are not the highest priority, we believe it may make sense to reduce the proposed allocation in this And it's interesting because I hadn't raised anything about Ahern Field publicly. This was a private email to city staff, but I went back today and looked at the emails the city council received to our general city council email before and after I sent that. Before I sent that email, we hadn't received any emails from folks about Ahern Field. 90 minutes after I sent that email, we started getting emails in support of Ahern Field. and we ultimately got more than a dozen emails in support of a here and field improvements in the 48 hour period after I sent that email. And it's possible that timing is totally coincidental, but it also seems possible there was some coordination between city staff and residents advocating for turf on a Heron Field.

There's nothing necessarily nefarious about that, but it was a bit confusing then to find out a year later there wasn't as much community engagement around this as the city council thought there had been when we had this in our budget. I'll be honest, I am not an expert on the science of grass versus turf. I haven't had a chance to look into every single pro and con because it has never actually come before us for a vote. or even a real discussion. And we have a million other items before us, including at our agenda tonight. But I am a city councilor and I'm frustrated that the city council was at best not really engaged on this issue. may be actually provided with confusing info to make it seem like there was unanimous support for turf when it came up last year when we know now that there are a lot more folks who are opposed to it. I tried to raise these questions more than a year ago. We didn't have that discussion then because of the challenges in our finance committee process that we're still working through and that make it really hard for the city council to have meaningful input in the city budget.

and folks have asked me who has the ultimate authority here and clear then, clear now, it is ultimately the city manager who has the authority on this, the city council. can ask, we could all nine of us say one thing and the city manager could still do another thing. That's the structure of our government right now. but I think it's important to think about how this was set up and if this were Somerville and Mayor Jake Wilson were saying, We're going to put turf on this field and I was elected by the voters and this is the decision I'm making and if you don't like it, you can vote me out. The residents of Cambridge don't have that choice right now. There's no way to really go to the top if they aren't involved with this decision. We want the system to work. The city manager really has to engage with the city council and do community engagement on issues ahead of time to make sure there is real buy-in for that. And I don't know if that happened here.

at the end of the day this is just a report so the only thing we can do tonight is put it on file but you know I am frustrated at how we've gotten to this point and do think we could have had these conversations More than a year ago before the budget allocation was even proposed and not now when we're just a few weeks before things being implemented. So we're going to continue to engage on this, but we'll yield back for now.

I can provide some response. Through you, Mayor Siddiqui, in 60 seconds. You know, I would just acknowledge that I think in terms of how we've done the community conversation over grass-first turf, there could be a lot improved. I would also say, reflecting on this conversation, and as I look at communities both locally and across the country, I think this is actually an incredibly hard conversation everywhere it's being had. I don't know if folks saw the article about the debate in Nantucket or the New York Times article in New Jersey or even our neighboring community in Arlington. I think every community is weighing these trade-offs and I want to recognize that they really are trade-offs turf is not grass and there is something about

especially this moment in time where we're losing some sense of the natural and yet at the same time grass is not able to handle The kind of frequent activity that we would love to see our kids playing and participating in. I think just to say, in other communities where this has been a long conversation, like Arlington, they have landed essentially where we are now, which is that There needs to be a case-by-case conversation and also a lot of the testing and very strict requirements that we have put in place are the ones that they've adopted. And so they've had the same back and forth debate. They've ended up actually with a crumb rubber field that they're extensively testing. But in many ways, I think communities are landing in a similar spot.

We're going to go to Councilor McGovern and then Vice Mayor Azeem.

Thank you Madam Mayor. Through you, first I want to thank everyone who has been contacting us and who testified whether They support turf or grass. Obviously, people are very passionate about this. We're ultimately talking about people's kids and enjoyment. and open space in neighborhoods. So I really do appreciate the work that people have put into this. you know this is kind of this has been really difficult for me anyway I'm in some ways it's been more difficult for me than The housing conversation, because I know where I stand on housing. You know, I'm a youth sports person. I coach, or did coach, grew up playing Cambridge Youth Soccer, coached Cambridge Youth Soccer.

played Little League, coached Little League, do a sponsor, use sports all over the city and all different types of sports. So I get that. If the primary focus of this field is for sports use, then there are a lot of valid arguments that turf You know, makes sense. But it's more than that, right? It's not just about The sports and the activities during those sports, it is about people who use that space when it's not organized sports, right? And to that, grass... seems to make a whole lot more sense, right? I just, I finally got a lawn mower. I'm cutting my grass myself and I love it and it smells wonderful. And so it's really difficult. I guess Mr. Manager, I guess a few questions.

When I look at the report and I look at the community outreach and I know that there were meetings and there was community outreach, I don't know how, if we did that well, we end up with a petition of 2,000 people saying, well, we didn't even know this was happening and we don't agree with it. So do we do, but I mean, that's been done. Like, do we ever... We talk about process all the time. Do we ever go back and look and do like a post-mortem on what we did and what we did wrong and make those corrections the next time? Because I feel like we're here a lot. where decisions get made and people say we never knew about it or we don't think our concerns were addressed. So that's one thing I want to sort of put out there is that Regardless of where this lands, we have to continue to do better there. And then second, I would say, and Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler mentioned this,

Just where the powers given our city charter kind of lie. And so we could place this on file, which is normally what we do. It doesn't mean we agree with it. It just means you gave us the report we asked for. We could send it back to you for further consideration, but I guess my question to you is would sending it back to you for further consideration actually do anything? have you made up your mind is this a done deal and we just need to just it's done or are you open to making a change and going to grass because I don't want to also waste people's time and energy if you've made up your mind and It's going to be turf and that's it. Whether I like it or other people like it or not, I don't want to drag people along for a really emotional and hard conversation for no reason. So is this a done deal?

Through you Mayor Siddiqui, I think maybe first I can have Deputy City Manager Watkins just give a sense of like timing and where we are in the process then I'll talk a bit and we're probably gonna go over 60 seconds.

So I think the process question is a really important one. So when we were at City Council for the appropriation for the budget hearing last year, we talked about our fern field being a turf field. Staff went into the process with the community trying to be very clear that that was not a decision. So that was a decision that was already made. because one of the things we get accused of and we want and they were really sensitive to is going out to the community and the oh we have all these options what do you like and if we've already made a decision we want to be more transparent about that so I think That is one piece of this discussion. I think we do always do sort of a post-mortem in terms of what went well, what worked, what didn't work. And so that is absolutely part of the ongoing process around any of these community engagements. But to the second point, I'll turn it over to

I'd say the way that I have thought about this, and I just really want to recognize, I think this is actually meant to be how we have and some of these community conversations and I really appreciate both the people that have been engaged on this topic and the many that I talked to certainly over this weekend I think these trade-offs are real. And I think it's also difficult because My sense is that when given an option between a grass field and a turf field, everyone is going to choose a grass field. And I think that's the energy that we are feeling. The challenge is that, in reality, the choice that we have is not simply between a grass field and a turf field. It's between grass fields that can't withstand the kind of frequent use and the need for more sports time if we support more sports time in a turf field.

and I think that's much to what Deputy City Manager Watkins noted that we are doing everything we possibly can to maintain our grass fields and the idea that we can simply maintain them more is not actually real. In order to maintain them more, we need to rest them. And we need to rest them at exactly the time when they're in demand. And when they're in demand is 4 to 7 PM on weekdays. And that's where we really get challenged. And I would say part of what you are hearing from the city, and I know that there is some characterization to say the city administration isn't listening, that we haven't engaged the community, I think what you are hearing is from the people that are responsible for building and maintaining The fields in the city, they're the people that are scheduling them. They're the people who are seeing the utilization and it's the organizations

the volunteers really who are leading our sports organizations who are responsible for booking and scheduling and they're the ones that are telling us as the people who are supposed to help them continue to find opportunities for youth to play sports, they're the ones telling us they don't have enough access at the times that they need it. And I think it's tough because in these conversations, I know everybody is well-meaning and pointing to a lot of different options that we should be looking into. I guarantee that if there were easy options, if MIT or Harvard was sitting on a field that wasn't being used, we would be using it. If there was an easy way to build multi-story grass fields, we would be doing that as well. But a lot of these really aren't options. And community after community have been faced with this exact decision and had these same conversations.

and it is just ultimately a trade-off where we are proposing and we are planning and we have been moving forward with the plan to build out a turf field that I think will allow for significantly more youth sports, and especially in East Cambridge. And I think I want to recognize that that does have some kind of cost, and we are doing everything we can to mitigate those. and I think that is the responsibility of the city to come to the council and to have that recommendation and I think at this point we are very far along in the process and I think we should stay the course and I recognize that that's a hard thing to say.

We have Vice Mayor Zee.

Thank you, Mr. City Manager. I was just internalizing that response. I guess I have a question. Given where we are in the process, we've heard perhaps the cost of the field would be a couple million dollars. and turning into turfs. If we ended up not proceeding, would we have a few extra million dollars we could perhaps put into the school next door or something?

Through you, Mayor, so there was money that was appropriated for the field, so it was for specific park use. The incremental cost between a full grass field and the turf field is between The numbers that have been stated don't include the difference because you would obviously redo the full turf field. If it was grass, natural turf, you would also fully reconstruct the field with You know irrigation and with drainage and any number of other improvements. So the differential cost is much smaller than what's been reported.

Okay, I would say that I came here today not having a very strong opinion on the differences between grass and turf, but much rather seeing this as a change of use, right? which is like I think that it's inherently kind of two different products that we're offering which is if you have turf that's meant for more people who are you know practicing sports but from all across the city who want to come and use those fields and there is a shortage of fields and there is a high interest in sports and you know the product that's kind of there right now is grass which is more for the local people in the neighborhood who want to go on a walk who want to feel that and be able to take a picnic in the middle of the day and maybe some light sports shoes as well. But I think they're inherently different sorts of things. I will say that I've been impressed and a little bit overwhelmed with the amount of public comment today in that I think that in my five years of city council, I've never once seen public comment where the majority of people were new faces.

And so I think that that is a credit to all the people who've come forward. I think at this point, this is not necessarily what I was going to say at the beginning of it, but it feels like there's a pretty strong I'm interested in staying in the grass sort of thing. And I feel like we should try to figure out how to reconcile that I think that we talk about doing this on a case-by-case basis, right? But I think maybe that is wrong. I think that with other sorts of things, such as the Cycling Safety Ordinance or other sorts of things, we've been like, each individual decision is really hard. But if we thought at a city level, like here's the amount of turf that we want so we can accommodate the amount of sports use you wanted, and here's the amount of grass that we need for all sorts of neighborhood uses, maybe we should think about it in a little bit more of a comprehensive manner than on a case by case.

And so I'm not sure exactly what to say at this point because I feel like I've also taken the position that very strongly if the council feels like a decision should be made a different direction, that we should adhere by that decision. and I feel that it actually helps justify this form of government where I'm very proud that we're basically the only city in Massachusetts not laying off people right now and I think that this system of government is a little bit fragile where people need to feel like actually decisions can go in a different direction, even if there is sunk in costs, because people feel like it's the wrong decision. So I'm not exactly very satisfied with that answer. And I do hope that There is an ability to not let this be the end of this conversation.

Anyone who hasn't spoken yet would like to speak on this matter?

Yes, go ahead. Through you, Madam Mayor. You bring up really good points about the field and the many uses of the field. And I just want to point to two quick things. One is the site and the design process that we have gone through. is designed to try to accommodate the most hours, the most use for the most amount of people. Lots of the people that use that site for passive recreation are those bringing their kids to our food program or our basketball leagues or our street hockey leagues. and they're hanging out. They're usually hanging out in the shaded areas off to the side of the field. We've tried to be really intentional about listening to what people want and providing that with our design team. When you ask for a deeper conversation, I think that that's what you're going to continue to see with our design team as we continue to roll through the project. The thing that doesn't show up on any of these is the amount of numbers that we can't use the field for.

Because when you look at the citywide inventory, and there are construction projects and things that go up and down for fields, and our inventory changes every year. But when you look at the amount of play we're able to accommodate, especially in this neighborhood, there's a drastic difference between the east side of town and the north and west side of town, as is stated in the report. We really looked at this as a total inventory thing and then also have heard from a lot of folks over the years like the impact of their program. Flag football was a significant one where 70% of their kids for whatever reason weren't able to or didn't want to go to the north and west side of the city, but when it was in their neighborhood, they were able to come out and play. and I think that that matters quite a bit and that that was something that we held close to our heart is like all the testimonials and what we've seen for demand and usage and what we've been able to offer people across the city over the years. So the conversation will continue. We'll continue to hear from all sides.

And hopefully we can get the most amount of hours for the most amount of people for the most amount of time. That's been the goal. Thank you.

Simmons, did you want to say anything? Councilor McGovern, you had your hand up? And we'll go to Councilor Zusy, and it's 9.03 p.m. Yeah, I mean, I

I mean, this is tough. This is frustrating, I think. I hear what the city is saying, and I don't disagree that you can get more use out of a turf field than out of a grass field in this climate. But again, it comes back to Is this and should this be more than just a playing field for organized sports? And it sounds like to folks in the community it is. So if we, I guess I had mentioned, I had said that we could send this back. I got a note saying I don't think that we can. I know we've done it in the past, and I'm not sure we're allowed to, so I don't. know if we actually can. I think maybe the only option we have is to put it on file. Maybe the clerk can comment on that in a second.

But I think there needs to, if this is going to go forward with turf, I think there really needs to be some real work done with folks in the community. I think there really needs to be some repair work done there. I think the ideas that Councilor Flaherty and Al-Zubi brought up about cooling and not just working into our heat protocol, but if sprinklers or other things to help because ultimately it's the health of the kids that I think is most important. But man, it's frustrating because here we are in this tough budget time, as Councilor, Vice Mayor Azeem said, and we're investing money in new fields, which most other communities are not doing. Instead of celebrating that, there's people that feel really hurt and damaged by this process, and that's just, I wish we could all be excited about it, but the way this unrolled and the way this happened, you're gonna have a lot of people who really feel I'm hurt by this decision and upset with this decision.

I really wish that wasn't the case. Because either way we look at it, it's going to be an improvement over what, you know, the Dust Bowl in some ways that's there. And it's not just about the field, it's about the other improvements that are happening. But, I mean, what are our options here? Madam Mayor, through the clerk, I mean... What can we do with this?

So my understanding is that typically we move to, we place this on file. Any counselor can make a motion at any time and say, I move that we do X. That motion can get chartered and someone can bring in a motion at an X meeting. Typically, it's to get placed on file. That is always our procedure.

Through you, Madam Mayor. So in terms of timing on this, and maybe it was in here and I just missed it. When are you planning on moving forward with this? Is this really a decision that has to be made now? Can there be more conversation about this? And then again, would that conversation make a difference?

Through you Mayor Siddiqui, so the design team is actively working on these designs and and so it is like it is ongoing and so when people talk you know the original order came in and said don't start construction and so we haven't done that but The design is ongoing. The design teams are actively working on the bid documents with the goal of having those done in July so that we can get detailed pricing and so construction can actually begin. and so it is an imminent process that is underway. And do we... Sorry, through you, Madam Mayor.

Do we... Who's involved in sort of making this decision? Because we have so many different departments, and sometimes our goals conflict, right? And so did we talk to the Office of Sustainability? Are they... saying that the turf is okay and meets our goals? Who made this decision ultimately?

We can go back to the original decision, but before the Office of Sustainability, every time we've had a turf discussion, we've actively involved the Department of Public Health. They've been an active participant in this. as we've looked at what is the best detail, how do we reduce risk, how do we make this the best product it can be, and so that's going back probably 10 years now that we've been having public health actively engaged in these conversations. During this process we also talked with Office of Sustainability who put us in contact with some of the folks they've been dealing with at both Harvard and MIT who've had very similar conversations as we have in terms of the turf fields providing much more Use, their players actually preferring them because they're consistent. They know their practices aren't going to get canceled for the exact same reasons we've talked about.

and then also specifying very similar details as we are to again continue to reduce those risks, to reduce the heat impacts and so get the best product.

Thank you. My time is up.

Zusy.

Thank you, Mayor Siddiqui. So I wanted to go back to my question about why not put the turf field at Gold Star Mothers Park? We have $14 million budgeted for that. And then another idea, we're about to spend $10 million on the First Street Garage. Why not put a turf with a bubble on the top of the First Street garage? It would be a four-season field so kids could play all year long. Apparently there's one over a garage near MGH, so that would be another option. So I'd love to hear your thoughts about those ideas.

Through you, Mayor. I don't know if you want to talk a little bit about some of the other fields. We did look at Gold Star Mothers. Did not recommend that for a number of reasons. In terms of the First Street Garage, that $10 million is really on... very critical structural issues. And so that is not about sort of adding additional weight or adding additional facilities So that's not been something that would budgeted and would be a much more significant cost and I don't know the feasibility of that. I will say this goes back to the city manager's comments a little bit before where every time this comes up it's like look at Harvard. We've been trying to do that as much as we can and I'm not saying it's not technically feasible but I don't know what the structural impacts or the cost impacts which would be much more significant than upgrading an existing grass field. And I don't know, Adam, if you could talk a little bit about the other locations that we did look at

Sure, and through you, Madam Mayor, I'm actually going to introduce Kevin Butow, who's a landscape architect, works with DPW, and we've been working very closely together on this project and several others.

Through you, Madam Mayor, we did look at Gold Star Mothers and the rectangle that fits on Gold Star is actually quite a bit smaller than a Hearn, so that was the main reason Excuse me, that we ruled out Gold Star because it could not accommodate as large a soccer field or a rectangle, multi-sport rectangle, as well as the Hearn could.

So as an option, I just think if we're clever enough and creative enough, we can come up with a different solution. Because Ahern currently is sort of a common You know, it's a park as well as a playing field. So anyway, I really appreciate the youth sports community They have a growing group playing youth soccer. I appreciate their commitment to enabling kids' ability to play by providing more playing fields. Then you always have to balance that out against the unorganized people that just like a grassy lawn, that they're not as organized as the youth sports group. So if we gave you another week, do you think you might be able to come up with some other alternative solutions?

That's what I would really like.

Through Mayor Siddiqui, honestly, I do not believe that is the case. This team has worked extremely hard looking at a lot of alternatives to try to find space in East Cambridge to have an all-weather field. I think one of the things we talked about in the report was the different variety of spaces in East Cambridge. So I think, again, we're trying to balance a lot of different needs. There are other areas that can continue to provide sort of a very Informal Open Grass Spare, so if people are looking for that, or a number of dog park areas in East Cambridge. you know over the years as we have been renovating different parks you're really trying to figure out what is that full portfolio of open spaces and I do not believe that there is a solution that but for a week that this team would not have already found

Zusy.

Doran, I wish, I mean, it doesn't seem like the Volpe site will be, I know it's called Kendall Crossing now, but it seems like it won't be developing as quickly as we thought it would. Wouldn't there be an opportunity for some playing fields there if MIT... supported the idea until things pick up.

Through you, I do not believe so. So, I mean, there's a lot of construction activity that's happening there. And again, sports fields are not sort of quick, temporary things. They can be pretty significant costs. There's probably environmental contamination in terms of you know going in and excavating on private property there's a lot of utility work that's ongoing on that site and so I think there are a lot of constraints there that would not make that a viable option.

Thank you very much, I yield.

So I have been advised that one option that I had not mentioned related to this was that the council can table the communication. and then at whatever point it can be taken off the table. But that is a non-debatable motion, so someone can make that motion. you know I'll just I haven't spoken on this and so what I'll say is that you know I think what I've hearing from the everyone and from the the staff is you know there's I think a lot of concern around process and I think the staff has acknowledged you know where you know that's fallen short and but I do think there is there are a lot of questions still that some of the body does have and concerns and so I want to So those are the two things that are happening. You all have recommended this.

I think there's a number of concerns that the body has. I think, you know, where we go from here I think is hard. I think the manager has said that they are, I really want to recommend this based on the work that's been done. They're saying that there's no options, that there are trade-offs. I understand, I think factually I do understand There's a lot on this area that has been uncovered that I myself didn't know about to many of my colleagues' points. But unfortunately the action right now that's before us is to place this on file if that's the will of the body.

Madam Mayor?

Yes, Councilor Al-Zubi.

I'd like to move a motion to table the CMA.

So Councilor Al-Zubi has moved to table this communication. So that's a non-debatable motion. We'll do a roll call on tabling that communication.

Al-Zubi? Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azeem? No. No. Councilor Flaherty?

No.

No. Councilor McGovern? Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan? Absent. Councilor Simmons? No. No. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler?

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Zusy?

Yes.

Yes. Mayor Siddiqui? Yes. Yes. And you have five members recorded in the affirmative, three recorded in the negative, and one recorded as absent.

The matter is tabled. We will go on to policy orders. I will entertain a motion to suspend the rules to bring forward charter right number one, which is the zero waste master plan ordinance changes.

I'll pull four or five. I'll make the motion.

Can someone suspend the rules? So all those in favor of suspension to bring Charter right number one forward. Say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. I wanted to bring this forward. This is the zero waste master plan ordinance changes. The charter right was exercised by Councilor Simmons. I know that Councilor Nolan has this is kind of her baby and so and she's not here so I'm going to move to table this and so that's exactly what I was going to do great so we'll go ahead and do a roll call on that on tabling zero waste master plan ordinance changes.

Councilor Al-Zubi? Yes. Yes, Vice Mayor Azeem? Yes. Yes, Councilor Flaherty? Yes. Yes, Councilor McGovern? Nolan, absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Councilor Zusy? Yes. Yes. Mayor Siddiqui?

Yes.

Yes. And you have eight members recorded in the affirmative and one recorded as absent.

That item on zero waste master plan ordinance changes is tabled. We'll go back to policy orders. Pleasure of the city council. Poll four and five. Councillor Flaherty, polls four and five. Madam Mayor. And then Councillor Simmons and then Councillor Azzubi. Simmons, what do you would like to vote? Two. Number two? Mm-hm. I'll vote number three. You're good? Okay, so we've pulled two, three, four, and five. We'll go ahead and do a roll call on adopting policy order number one.

Councillor Azzubi. Yes, Vice Mayor Azeem. Flarety? Yes. Councilor McGovern? Yes. Councilor Nolan is absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Councilor Zusy? Yes. Mayor Siddiqui? Yes. Yes, and you have seven members recorded in the affirmative and two recorded as absent.

Policy number one is adopted. We'll go to policy number two. The City Manager is requested to confer with the Police Department, the Community Safety Department, the Emergency Communications Department, the Department of Human Services Programs, the Department of Public Works, the Law Department, and any other relevant city departments and community partners to develop a neighborhood Simmons, and Councilor Flaherty. Councilor Simmons, you have the floor.

Thank you. This is on policy order number two, correct?

Yes, number two.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. The Council recently made the decision to discontinue the city's use of shot spotter technology. I believe we have a responsibility to ask an important follow-up question. What comes next? I'm sorry? Can you speak into the mic? I am. The purpose of this order is to simply ask that we take a comprehensive look at what additional steps, resources, and investments may be needed to continue strengthening neighborhood safety in Cambridge. and every neighborhood deserves to feel safe in their homes, on their streets, in their parks, and in the public spaces that make our community special. If the city chooses to move away from One approach I think it's only responsible that we take a serious look at what additional steps we can take to continue supporting safe and healthy neighborhoods. This order asks for a thoughtful report on the range of possibilities, including community-based violence prevention efforts, youth outreach, environmental improvements such as lighting and visibility, improved

Communication with residents, targeted patrol strategies, and other evidence-informed approaches that our departments believe may be effective. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this order so that we can continue to work together alongside our residents and community partners to build neighborhoods where people feel safe, supported and connected. With that I yield.

Flaherty. Did you want to say anything on this?

Just very quickly, I, through you, Madam Mayor, I champion everything that my colleague, Councilor Simmons, has said. These are real issues. There are real lives and real people living in Our neighborhoods in Cambridge that deserve the respect and dignity of each municipality making sure that we're using whatever tools we have at our disposal to make sure that they're safe. And that's really a non-negotiable point, so I yield.

We'll go to Councilor Al-Zubi.

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor, I'm going to motion to put forth an amendment. And I would scratch the first amendment you got, because I went ahead and conceded the The first order that I had struck out, so what you see in the most up-to-date amendment is the third whereas clause. There's a part of it that I struck. Zubi, can you speak closer to the mic?

Naomi is saying there's trouble hearing.

Yeah, is this better? Okay, cool. So in the whereas clause, the third one, I struck the language what additional resources, strategy, staffing, partnerships, or investments may be needed to ensure that the city is not merely removing an existing tool, but actively and concurrently strengthening and I crossed that out, added the language, how the city can continue evaluating and improving and then it's broader approach to neighborhood safety based on available evidence, community input and demonstrated need. In the first ordered, I just removed the additions and in the last order, I struck out The main points in which I'm bringing this forth is The way that this was framed, it was framed on the premise that ShotSpotter was helping, which it arguably was not. And that's what the council had voted on. And I do share the concern for public safety. I really do, and I appreciate that. And I'd love to explore that with you. I am okay with supporting this with the amendments, but I know off the top I don't personally support some of the ideas on this list.

There was a lot going on on there, and I would hope that we can get a report on the feasibility of some of these and get more involved as a council than just listing them out and then call for implementation. I'm hoping the amendments passed and if not I'll most likely be a present vote but just wanted to offer this for the council to consider. I'll yield.

I have Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler and then we have Vice Mayor Azeem and then we'll go to Councilor Zusy. So Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, you have the floor.

Thanks, Madam Mayor, through you. Yeah, similar to what I said, I think the last time we talked about this, I think there's a goal from everyone on the council here to increase public safety, and I think that's the Al-Zubi. I think the original policy order as written while having a good intent is a bit confusing. It's asking a lot of city staff without providing a lot of guidance on how to do it or evidence around things. And some of the pieces that were suggested in the original policy order don't have anything to do with ShotSpotter. I'm reaching out to the care team in the community safety department. Having them more present in the community is something I'm very much in support of. That's not really connected to ShotSpotter. So I think the amendments from Councilor Al-Zubi that I'm a co-sponsor of help clarify that. Happy to to pass those amendments and then pass the underlying policy order and think that is a good compromise. I'll go back.

I have Vice Mayor Azeem and then Councilor Zusy.

So I don't really care about Schatzwater. I mean, it's gone. We should stop debating whether it was helpful or not. And so I'm fine with removing that if that's what people want. I'm not sure I understand what the meaningful difference is. Is the intended result supposed to be different? I think that fundamentally, as I see it, the question is like, hey, For example, we know that summer is a time of high gun activity in Cambridge. There's a couple of spots where we're concerned about, can we do something extra to help ensure that it's safe, right? and then to get a report back with some recommendations of like here's some options is like the actual like goal the same with these amendments? Are we just fighting over like, you know, Al-Zubi.

Yeah, so again, like I said, the third whereas clause, again, takes to account the fact that ShotSpotter, it argues the premise that ShotSpotter did help, and so that's that piece. And then the second part of it is just to recognize that we should be engaged in these conversations and we shouldn't just move towards implementation. So I don't think it necessarily significantly changes the policy order at all. In fact, I worked to make sure that I was as concise as possible with the amendments made so that we can ensure that we have a conversation from this because we should be talking about public safety. And I think that Councilor Simmons does raise a good point about having that conversation, so. I yield.

Vice Mayor?

So I guess the follow-up question I have is just on this last order then, right? It says includes recommended actions, costs. And so is the goal that whatever would come back would be more abstract? So it would be like, here are five things we could do instead of here are five things that we could do with you know you know cost estimate and like we ran this by city departments and we think that they're ready to go and you guys can choose

Zubi.

I'm not sure I'm understanding your question. The order before that talks about specifics that we can unpack. And we would get the feasibility of those in a report. So we would just be able to have a discussion about those, which I think is valid. Like we should be talking about those. I think the part of that ordered is talking about implementation, which is a whole nother piece.

So I will yield for now. I think that I don't really care about the whereases, whatever we do with them, but I feel like I'd love to unpack the order more and maybe that will happen as we continue on in the conversation.

I have Councilor Zusy.

Thank you, Mayor Siddiqui. I support the amendments to the policy order. I think they just make it tighter. And what I also like about it is we don't have additional money So I agree the intention of the policy order as originally proposed and even continuing on is to ensure that our residents feel safe, right? So what we need to be doing is working smarter, evaluating existing programs and working smarter rather than Al-Zubi, and Councilor Sabrina-Wheelers. I just think it's a tighter version of the policy order and it doesn't talk about adding on but evaluating and working smarter. Thank you. I yield.

Zizzi Yields. We will go to Councilor McGovern.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Through you, just on the amendments, the first Amendment and the whereas. I wonder if the sponsors of the amendment would consider. Because I think the part of the line, what additional resources, strategies, staffing partnerships, or investments may be needed to ensure that the city, I think I'm fine with that. I think where it gets sticky is where it says not merely removing an existing tool because that's the shot spotter piece. What if we just removed not merely removing an existing tool. So it read, the discontinuation of any public safety tool should be accompanied by a serious review of

What additional resources, strategies, staffing partnerships or investments may be needed to ensure that the city is actively and concurrently strengthening how the city can continue evaluating? I don't think you have to take out the whole line is what I'm saying. And then the second question, or I guess it's, There's that one little deletion there. On the last, if you could talk about the goal of eliminating in the last order that deletion and what was the purpose of that. But I think we can get... I think we can, on the first one, I think we can get to what everybody wants. If we just shorten what gets deleted, but then I wanna hear about the last deletion too.

Councilor Al-Zubi?

Yeah, so back to the third whereas clause. I'm okay with unstriking what additional resources, strategies, staffing partnerships, or investments may be needed to ensure the city and then Cut it off there. I'm okay with making that concession. On the last ordered, again, it's based on the piece of implementation. The order before talks about specific ideas, and I'd love to be able to get the feasibility of those ideas and have a discussion about it, and then talk about what next steps could look like. But this policy order is just moving towards implementation already. I think we should have the conversation about this. I just don't think we should be saying here's what we should do and then here's the implementation timeline for it. That's where that comes from.

So, Councilor Al-Zubi will concede that to your recommendation, Councilor McGovern, which is, Naomi, if you can help out with this, is to keep in what additional resources, strategies, staffing, partnerships, or investments may be needed, period.

It would eliminate not merely removing an existing tool but. That would be deleted. Everything else would stay in. So it would read, what additional resources, strategy, staffing, partnerships, or investments may be needed to ensure that the city is actively and concurrently strengthening?

I'm not able to edit this file that was sent, so I can't make the change in real time.

Okay. Folks get it?

So we're unstriking. What additional resources, strategies, staffing, partnerships, or investments may be needed to ensure that the city is not removing an additional existing tool?

No, no, no. You're striking... The only thing you're striking is not merely removing an existing rule, but everything else stays in.

Yeah, okay. Do folks understand that?

So this is on the amendment we're voting? On the amendment to the amendment? Yes. Okay.

So all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. And then there's a few more amendments. So do folks have any issues with those amendments before we go vote?

Do I get the floor?

Councilor Simmons.

Great. So to my colleague, I appreciate the work that you put into this. I wish you had reached out to us so we could have really had a conversation on the floor and come right back to the floor as a united front. Because it's hard to parse this out. on the floor like this. And I'm so cognizant of the time. And this is so important. I wouldn't want to rush it. So I'm going to exercise my charter.

Simmons exercises her charter right we will move on to policy or number three that the city manager is requested to use federal stabilization fund provide one-time stabilization pay Stabilization payments to Cambridge-based and Cambridge-serving organizations impacted by FY27 MOVA cuts. Report back to the City Council with the proposed funding plan and to work with the Mayor's Office and the other City staff to engage with the broader Cambridge non-profit community to assess the full scope of federal and state funding reductions and their impact on the city's safety net services. This was filed by myself, Councilor McGovern, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, and Councilor Zusy. and I'll just be brief and say that this policy order was filed after hearing directly from nonprofit service providers who focus on serving victims of violence and with conversations with the city manager who has also had his share of conversations.

I want to thank everyone who spoke during public comment and who has been vocal about the impacts that their organizations are experiencing from federal government actions. As a reminder, the federal grant stabilization fund was created just over a year ago to help address The funding gaps resulting from the actual or anticipated loss of federal funding for programs and services that benefit the most vulnerable Cambridge residents. I want to highlight that one piece of this policy order acknowledges that funding cuts are not limited to this area alone. It would not be sound fiscal management to draw from this pool only reactively, only when organizations We need to be more thoughtful and make sure that whatever amount we draw now and for all grants going forward takes the full landscape into account. That way we can equitably fill gaps across the board and be in a position to have broader conversations about where support is or will be needed most. So I just wanted to give that context.

I did have like a few questions to staff, but I don't see them here. But do other colleagues have questions or comments? Councilor Al-Zubi?

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor, I just have quick questions to the co-sponsors of this, because I'm definitely very inclined to support it, but also concerned about the emergency housing vouchers that I understand are budgeted in this. Do we have a confirmation or not on whether this would put those at risk?

It's my understanding, so there's two kinds of, there's a few vouchers that the city's funding. So the city is funding the, we put one million in the budget, in this year's budget for vouchers. Which one are you, what are you referring to specifically?

I'm referring to the 128 households.

So I'm not, I think it's

So there's the one million mixed status families, the one million that received vouchers from the Transitional Wellness Center, and then there's this emergency housing vouchers. So I just wanna make sure this wouldn't,

So in this year's budget, we have municipal supportive housing. We were funding $2 million in our budget for municipal supportive housing vouchers. So I think... That's an outstanding question. Yes, Councilor McGovern?

I think we moved that money into the regular budget. That was my understanding. So what came out of the emergency fund was moved over into next year's line item budget. I'm pretty sure.

But once the city manager is back, we can confirm that. But that was my understanding.

So his plan is to come back?

His water is here. So I imagine he'll be back.

Okay, I guess for in the meantime, again, inclined to support this, just want to make sure it doesn't like pit the emergency housing vouchers on it. So I guess was the intention from the people who co-sponsored it to potentially replace the decision to backstop the emergency housing vouchers if that's the case or to do both if we are working in this case.

So I think this was not to, you know, I think we have a lot of competing demands and interests, right? But this was not to pit folks against each other in that way. In this year's budget, There is municipal housing vouchers for mixed status families, which are at one million. And so I think we are funding We are funding those families. There could be potential cuts that come that we have not heard of, like the continuum of care funding, for example. We'll have to consider that as we go, but this was an immediate... Yes, apologies, what was the question?

The question was, did the emergency housing vouchers get budgeted in to our budget and moved out of the federal stabilization fund?

So there were two voucher programs that we started. One was for people transitioning out of homelessness, and we had funded that out of the FY26 budget. So that did not come out of the federal stabilization fund. The other voucher program, the mixed status households, did come out of the Federal Stabilization Fund, but we used it as one-time bridge funding for FY26, and we have built it into the FY27 budget that was approved. So the federal stabilization fund started with $5 million. We pulled out $1 million one time for mixed status households, and then $250,000 as part of the SNAP benefits program that was also one-time. So there's $3.75 million of one-time funding in the federal stabilization fund.

And that's what I was trying to clarify, Councilor Al-Zubi.

Gotcha, so the emergency housing vouchers are coming from where then in the budget?

The funding for mixed status households is built into the FY27 operating budget.

Okay.

I can point to the page number if you want.

That would be helpful, yeah, thanks.

And if I were just to add, I think we have, generally speaking, seen the stabilization fund as bridge funding. And so since we did a free cash allocation, It's essentially something that we can act on very quickly. And then we can always plan for the coming fiscal year if we have longer term funding, mixed status households, we will continue to have those Al-Zubi.

Thank you. So you're saying that we would be working towards backstopping emergency housing vouchers depending on where the federal government moves on this?

Sorry, that was mixed status households. I think in terms of the emergency housing vouchers, there is not a clear picture of exactly where those are going to land with the federal government. and there's both questions in terms of the emergency housing voucher program that was set up in the Biden administration and then also the continuum of care funding which were both in active litigation with the federal government on and also waiting for a final determination from HUD on what the future of that program will look like.

Councilor Al-Zubi, we have to move on because we've had back and forth. I can come back with you. Vice Mayor Azeem?

I'd actually love to pick up where Councilor Al-Zubi left off. So if those programs end up getting canceled, either the Biden era program or other that funding Would supplementary funding, if we wanted to backfill that, come from this emergency stabilization fund?

Through you Mayor Siddiqui, that would be the most likely place that we would look for funding in recognition that also the scale of both of those programs is more than the money we have in the federal stabilization fund at this point in time.

So we could only fund it to the tune of 3.75 million out of, let's say, cost. you know five or ten million dollars in total and if we you know spend that money on other sides so we only have 2.75 million we could only fund it out of the 2.75 extent

through you Mayor Siddiqui. Yes, I think we've always recognized and I think we've always recognized that the Federal Stabilization Fund was Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you. Thank you. I think you're pointing to the right question, which is how do we make decisions on immediate needs in recognition of the fact that there may be future needs that are hard to Hard to assess and also that it may be the case that we won't be able to fund all of the gaps that may open up over time.

Thank you. So I guess then my final question is, what do you think are the odds that we'll need this funding for that purpose?

Three, Mayor Siddiqui. It's tough to say on odds, so I would actually hesitate to even give a probability, even though I tend to like thinking in terms of probabilities. I also think the other dynamic is beyond simply the HUD programs. We also don't fully know how many additional challenges will come through both in the state budget and then further federal actions. And so it's pretty hard to assess. I think we're in a period of great uncertainty on this front. I think if I were to just offer though, I do feel like, you know, having had conversations with these organizations and having talked to the mayor and counselors to say it would be helpful for us to have this conversation. you know this does feel like a really immediate need that will have an impact in the very short term like the idea of finding some amount of bridge funding

to lessen the impact and give everybody more time to plan does make a lot of sense, and I think it is part of why we created this fund.

Ms. Muir?

Thank you. So I'm happy to support the policy order understanding that there actually are trade-offs that exist. And so we can all hope and pray that we don't need this money for other things.

We will go to Councilor Zusy and then Councilor McGovern and then Councilor Flaherty.

Thank you, Mayor Siddiqui. So I agree, I support this. I'm a co-sponsor. I do think the city manager and his staff need to broadly assess other potential gaps that we have to fill. and to allocate funds accordingly. I recognize the need for this funding but I'm not saying that we'll fill the whole gap or that we should fill the whole gap because I Again, I think we need to have money in the Rainy Day Fund. I think very well we could lose funding for other programs, so I think the idea of providing some sort of bridge, not a commitment to the whole 1.676570 is appropriate. And I thank you and I yield.

Thank you. First of all, I just want to thank the mayor for her leadership on this and working with the non-profits. So I just got a little My head started to spin a little bit with that explanation, so if you can just kinda dumb it down for me a little bit here. There are two sets of vouchers that we were dealing with. The emergency homeless vouchers, And that was part of the conversation around Spalding closing and all that. And then there's the mixed status families. If I heard you correctly, and again, maybe I didn't, that the funding for both of those are going to be in the 27 budget?

Yes.

Okay, so it's not coming, so the, those 128 or so households that are receiving the emergency housing vouchers will be funded for 2027. No. Those are different programs. Different programs. Okay. Well, you know, I just, I would love to go for my three minutes and 40 seconds railing on the fact that it just really I got yelled at for using, you know, saying GD last meeting, but it really bothers me that we are put in this position because of a federal government that doesn't give a you-know-what about people. We have to sit here and have a debate about whether or not we're going to give some funding to people who are doing vital work around domestic violence and sexual abuse. and Immigration and put that up against housing people.

And the fact that we're put in this position sucks, and I don't care if people yell at me for saying that. But we also have to deal with emergencies as they come up. That was the purpose of this. you know look nobody on the on this council I don't think anybody would disagree has fought harder for vouchers and other services for unhoused people than I have and so I'm not going to simply say we can't fund those things anymore. My intention is that if we run out of money through the emergency fund, That we're going to find another way to pay for those vouchers. I'm not going to support putting anybody out on the street. But at the same time, we do have an immediate need right now where these organizations are going to be looking at laying people off like tomorrow. if they don't get some help. And so it stinks that we're in this position. I hate it.

And it's so hard to, as the vice mayor asked about predicting, you can't predict a goddamn thing about this government and what they're going to do and how they're going to make cuts. So we're going to be, unfortunately, forced into this situation a lot. where we're going to have to be trying to backfill some really damaging cuts by this federal government, and it stinks. But I do think we need to do this. because these organizations are vital and they need the funding now and as we move forward I will continue to support additional funding for those vouchers and other vouchers to keep people housed.

Councilor Flaherty?

Through you, Madam Mayor. So I understand we've got $3.7 million from the Federal Stabilization Fund. We need $1.6 million to support organizations that deal with victims of domestic violence, rape, etc. We've got an ability to do it, and we can do it, right?

Through you, Mayor Siddiqui, I think the $1.6 million represents the difference between what was requested from the state MOVA fund and I think in the conversation that I was having, given the breadth of the potential need across many other areas, I think we're probably more talking about how we're keeping them whole relative to FY26 rather than funding more than FY26. And I think it's also a question in terms of I feel like we can fully fund the full million dollar gap or whether we're going to try to get as close as we can. So I think those are some of the conversations and discussions that we need to have. Certainly interested in the council's thoughts. And would also just recognize this is,

both an immediate need that is deeply affecting a number of specific organizations that are working with very vulnerable people in a time of crisis. and at the same time we have a broader sector that also is experiencing different kinds of pressures and cuts as well. I just want to recognize that we're supporting both the immediate need, but also we need to think about how we're addressing the broader community needs that are also emerging.

Thank you very much. Thank you. And Madam Chair, I'd like to be added as a co-sponsor to this.

We will add you, Councilor Flaherty. All those in favor of adding Councilor Flaherty, say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. Anyone who hasn't spoken yet who'd like to speak on this before I go back to Councilor Al-Zubi? We'll go back to Councilor Al-Zubi.

Through you, Madam Mayor, I think there's a lot of confusion around the different pieces of housing, especially for low-income folks. and I really respect this policy order and I want to be able to support it. I'm just worried about the impacts this might have on how the city navigates It's emergency housing vouchers, especially when Trump is already making those impacts on other cities. So I would like some more time with this to be able to ask those questions financially. So I'm going to go ahead and try to write.

Al-Zubi exercises her charter right. We will move on to policy number four, that the city council shall complete the required review and determinations prescribed by section 2.18. .060C before taking any future vote regarding the continued use of ShotSpotter or any other surveillance technology. This was filed by Councillor Flaherty and Councillor Simmons. Councillor Flaherty, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So this is a policy order that is directed specifically to our process, to our procedure. Rules matter. Let me say that again because I think it's important. Rules matter. Our rules are called ordinances. Ordinances are a statutory construction that a municipality enacts that decides how we govern. that gives determinations, gives rules their teeth. And in this instance, the surveillance technology order, the surveillance technology ordinance is very clear and unambiguous, and it says that there are certain things that have to happen before we have a vote, and those things did not happen. If we look at 2.128.060 subsection C, subsection C is clear. It's unambiguous.

It says that The City Council must make specific determinations before voting to disprove any sort of surveillance technology. And we didn't do that in this case. The two point, 128.060 subsection C does not talk about subcommittee hearings. It doesn't talk about public safety committee hearings. It talks about the city council. and it says based upon a review of the annual surveillance report we've got to do two things. We've got to make a determination whether the Costs outweigh the benefits of whatever surveillance technology it is. Secondly, we've got to make a determination whether there are reasonable safeguards which exist that can address the privacy concerns. We did neither of those two things.

And then thirdly, after we make those determinations, the ordinance requires the city council to make Three considerations, whether to ask the city manager for a report, make modifications, or vote to disprove. We didn't do that. and so this policy order speaks directly to the procedure. We've had a lot of discussion in this chamber about rules. This is a rule and it's important to have rules and to follow rules. And the most important reason why we follow rules and basically the construction is it's the plain and ordinary meaning of the words. There's no ambiguity. There's no interpretation that's confusing any of this language. The words mean what they say, and it's not confusing. But this is important because here in this chamber,

We're often, all of us, myself, are talking about the federal administration that doesn't follow the rule of law. And that's true. They don't follow the rule of law. And we should. We've got to uphold the rule of law. We've also got to be, we have to, and the reason why we follow ordinance is so we can ensure consistency and predictability so people know how we're going to decide issues. And we're also maintaining our own accountability and being transparent. All of these are the goals of having ordinances. We've got an ordinance that we didn't follow in this case. This is a procedural failure. We took a vote which we should not have taken And in my view, that vote is therefore invalid.

and this policy order asks us to declare that vote invalid and we can return and we can go through the process exactly the way we should have gone through. and we did have a policy order that reported on the Public Safety Committee work and it talked about what it did, but it didn't talk about what it was required to do. It didn't talk about... benefits outweighing costs or costs outweighing benefits. It didn't talk about whether there were reasonable safeguards that could be used to address any privacy concerns. What it talked about, fundamentally, which is important, it talked about whether or not even a limited sort of acoustic detection could be used

by this data sharing arrangement that we have or Sound Thinking has through the Department of Homeland Security and whether This might lead to some sort of enforcement by ICE agents. Valid concern. But that's not what the ordinance requires us to do. And so this is not a... A procedural order, a policy order that asks to make a substantive change, but rather encourages all of us to follow our rules.

Thank you, Councilor Flaherty. That's your time. So we are at 9.56 p.m. What is the pleasure of the City Council?

Motion to extend by 30 minutes.

Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler moves to extend the meeting for another 30 minutes, so we'll end at 10.30. A discussion?

Yeah.

Councilor McGovern?

I really want to make sure we get through the housing stuff at the very least so we might need more time than that. I don't know if we want to go 30 minute intervals or we just want to extend it for longer than that so we don't have to keep coming back to a vote. I don't know if 30 minutes is enough. I could do extend by an hour. Yeah, extend it by an hour and if we don't need it, we don't need it.

So we, Councilor Simeone-Wheeler is moving to extend to go until 11. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

We'll do a roll call.

Councilor Al-Zubi. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Azeem. Yes. Yes. Councilor Flaherty. Yes. Yes. Councilor McGovern. Yes. Yes. Councilor Nolan. Simmons, No, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Yes, Councilor Zusy, Yes, Mayor Siddiqui, Yes, and you have seven members recorded in the affirmative, one recorded in the negative, and one recorded as absent.

Flaherty is finished. Who would like to speak next? Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Simmons.

Thanks, Madam Mayor. I'll be brief on this because we voted on this twice already at two separate meetings. We followed all the requirements. The law department said so. If they had things we had, they would be here. they're not. I personally think this policy order is out of order because you're not allowed to put forward things that have already been voted on. We've already voted on this. You can't put forward another thing. to argue that point. But I do think, too, a sports metaphor that I know my colleague appreciates. I think there's a thing where sometimes, and I've done this myself as a kid, but you lose a game, and then you're mad you lost, and you accuse the other side of cheating. You know, that gets boring after a while. And it's not, you know, we know where this is going to land. We know, I think, no one here is going to land. Call the question.

Sobrinho, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler has called the question, so we have to vote on calling the question and do a roll call on that, and then we have to proceed to the vote.

Councilor Al-Zubi? Yes. Yes, Vice Mayor Azeem? Yes, Councilor Flaherty? Yes. Yes, Councilor McGovern? Yes. Yes, Councilor Nolan? Absent. Councilor Simmons? No. No. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Councilor Zusy?

Yes.

Yes. Mayor Siddiqui? Yes. Yes. And you have seven members recorded in the affirmative, one recorded in the negative, and one recorded as absent.

So we have to go directly to voting on adopting the order.

Councilor Al-Zubi. No. No, Vice Mayor Azeem. No. No, Councilor Flaherty.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor McGovern? No. No. Councilor Nolan? Absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? No. No. Councilor Zusy?

No.

No. Mayor Siddiqui?

No.

No. And you have two members recording the affirmative, six recorded in the negative, and one recorded as absent.

Policy number four is not adopted. We move on to policy number five, that the city manager is requested to direct the community development department and other relevant city departments to examine and report back to the city council with a feasibility analysis with findings, options, and recommendations regarding the following proposed amendments to the multifamily zoning ordinance. This was filed by Councilor Flaherty and Councilor Zusy. Councilor Flaherty, you have the floor.

Thank you. Through you, Madam Chair. This isn't a game. This is the Multifamily Housing Zoning Ordinance. Nobody cheated when it was voted on and it was ordained and the impacts are real that are being felt in the city of Cambridge and the impacts are that The single family, two family, and three family homes are now incentivized to be demolished and replaced with four-story buildings with zero affordability components. Zero affordability components. No setbacks, no side yards, no back yards. And what this has done is displaced middle class families. All of this happened Despite the fact that we are maybe the second or third most dense city in Massachusetts, all of this happened in the wake of us partnering with the state and the federal government and spending 10 years

of our lives working on the Green Line extension to make Somerville and Medford more accessible to the high-paying jobs in Kendall Square. All of this happened and it exists on every street, every blocks, every neighborhood in the city of Cambridge. And what has happened as a result of this zoning ordinance is that developers have caught wind of it. and developers unlike governments, and unlike the affordable housing developers, private developers are driven by market forces. They're in it to make a profit. This comes from a fella who lived throughout college with a guy who became a real estate developer. He's one of my best friends in life. He's a great family man. He's a tremendous friend. He's a wonderful father. I'll tell you one thing, he's not. He's not benevolent. He's in it to make money.

And most of the people who are doing what they are doing throughout this city, every single neighborhood in this city, are in it to make money. And what they will do is they will manipulate the multifamily housing zoning ordinance to the best of their ability to increase profit margins. They have fiduciary duties. to their investors. That's what's happening in the city of Cambridge. That is real. That's happening on... I can go through the addresses and I'm sure everyone here in the council doesn't have to hear about Cushing Street, Wyman Street, Copley Street, Hutchinson Street. It goes on and on. In mid-Cambridge, in Central Square, in East Cambridge, in North Cambridge, in West Cambridge. and this the ultimate logical conclusion of all this will be if amendments are not made and again this policy order is asking for feasibility studies.

This is not a drop-dead list of amendments that must be made. These are things that I believe are important, that Councilor Zusy believes are important, that can impact Thank you very much. Not of families, not of neighborhoods, and we should be a city of families and neighborhoods, but we won't be. We will become a stopover. We'll be a city that's inhabited by young people who are deciding whether or not to spend their lives here who are making an awful lot of money in highest paying jobs maybe in Kendall Square or wealthy empty nesters. And that's the housing that's being produced. It's not family housing.

It's not housing with multiple bedrooms for children and for families that will continue to make Cambridge the vibrant and Sustainable City, it has been through its history. And the logical conclusion of all this will be, in the process, we will, maybe not in our generation, but in the next generation, Be a city very different from the city that we all live in right now. And our families, our children will be the ones that feel the effects of this, but right now in this city, right now, what is happening right now is tremendous market upheaval, tremendous disruption, and construction is not consistent, in any way, shape, or form with improving the stated goal of this multifamily zoning ordinance, which is to increase affordable housing stock. That is not happening.

That is not happening, not from this zoning ordinance. And therefore, we should direct the CDD to consider all potential amendments. And this is not an end list, but this is a list where we begin. I yield.

It's up to five minutes, just a reminder. So we'll go to Vice Mayor Azeem, Councilor Zusy, and then Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler. He had his hand first.

I'd like a motion to suspend the rules to bring forward petition one.

Councilor, Vice Mayor Azeem moves to bring the zoning petition before us. To suspend the rules. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. The zoning petition has been received from Doug Brown to amend the current articles and or sections numbered and entitled articles 2, 5, 6, 11, and 19. Height, Setback, Parking, Open Space, and Design Review Requirements. Vice Mayor Azeem.

Thank you. So I just wanted to address both of these together since they're similar in nature. I think certainly we have our differences in opinions on how we feel about housing. I looked at the census data. We're 50th out of 50 states in terms of permitting. And so we're not really doing as well as we might think we are. and I do think that housing has a positive effect and you can see that from Democrats all across the country from President Obama when he took the DNC last year to Elizabeth Warren will say, you know, a person pretty familiar with Cambridge, there's a supply and demand issue. The governor will say the same thing. The newly elected mayors of New York and potentially Nithya Raman, who's running for L.A., have said the same thing. And so it is not consensus on anything in this country, but it's about as broad a consensus as you can reach.

Now, I do think that there is space for amendments, and I thank Councilor Zusy and Councilor Flaherty for bringing these forward. We have a meeting scheduled for the 25th, And so I think that that's a natural time to talk about some of these. I think the idea of totaling setbacks I think that's something that's interesting. I would love to talk more about it. I'm not inherently against it. And so I feel like some of these things are worthwhile talking about and might become positive amendments. And I think that anything that affects housing, I think we'll have a much more difficult conversation and so I think that we can forward those to committee and I will say that the petition is a much more difficult one in that the petition you know really impacts the AHO. I think that's something we heard a little bit about in public comment and other colleagues want to speak too so I won't take that air but I will say

You know, I really do not like citizens' petitions in this nature or in this way because basically we are required by law to forward this to ordinance committee. and it will de facto take effect when it is forward to ordinance committee. So every project that it's making its way through the city, both market housing and affordable housing, I don't believe a single affordable housing project that's under projection right now would meet the qualifications of this new zoning project. So they're all going to have to be put on hold while we're dealing with this. And I don't think that's fair to hold hostage every project in the city because 10 people have an idea of what they want to do. So I think we've set up a process. You know, counselors with very different opinions on things have had two committee hearings. We've had a third one on the books. We're trying to work out and see what we can agree on and what we can't.

and I don't think that citizens petitions are really helpful in this specific way and so you know I think we have to forward it to committee but I did want to say that I'm not particularly excited about that and I would like to make a motion to pass for policy order number five to the house of

So procedurally, I'll just remind everyone that Vice Mayor Azeem is correct. The only action we can take on the petition is to refer to the ordinance committee and planning board for hearing a report. We can do that separately. Right now, Councilor, Vice Mayor Azeem has moved to refer policy order number five to the neighborhood and long-term planning meeting on June 25th. That's the motion.

The Housing Committee.

The Housing Committee.

Yeah.

So that's up for discussion. We can discuss that motion. I have. And we can discuss the policy order. We have Councilor Zusy, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor McGovern.

I have a point of information first. So since I was a co-sponsor of the policy order, shouldn't I have spoken for a second?

We usually just go to the main sponsor. That was what we do. Your time started.

So the whole point of Councilor Flaherty and I introducing this policy order was to get some discussion on the floor about amendments to inform the meeting on the 25th. because like with the tree ordinance discussion last week, it was helpful. It'll inform the discussion on the 22nd. We're eager to hear your ideas. We put some things out there and we're eager to hear what you think. But isn't it a good thing to make something better and correct unintended consequences. So Councilor Flaherty and I are not asking to rescind the zoning. We're proposing to make it better, and we're offering different suggestions. and I guess if we're looking at, I guess I don't have to talk so much about the Brown petition, but we're talking about You know, height, setbacks. I'm glad there's some sympathy for that.

It seems like we really need to be thinking about how to make them flexible. so that if you have a house that's on a nonconforming lot, you can be further from it, or a mature tree, you can move it over. So you can put the building at the proper place on this site. So I hope that you will all be open to that discussion. Height. There is a real issue. And I think this idea of exploring the possibility of relating the house or the building to the width of the right-of-way. I just wanted to clarify right-of-way is lot line to lot line. So a six-story building would only be on a major thoroughfare, not on narrow streets. The idea is to consider right-of-way widths of 55 feet. And that, again, would be lot line to lot line and greater. I think that's something worthy of discussing.

The Brown petition has something else concerned about neighborhood. We're interested, both of us, all of us, in open space. And I think the most important thing is that green roofs and balconies should not qualify as open space, nor should permeable pavers. We need the open space to be at the ground level so it's truly permeable and it'll help us. We're less likely to flood if we've got trees that absorb hundreds of gallons of water and we've got truly permeable ground to absorb water. And then we don't want to have canyons. We don't want, you know, it's not in the best interest of the city. We want good design. We don't want maximum building wall lengths.

to be longer than 25 to 40 feet along the setback line, or a building 25 to 40 feet We want to make sure that we just don't have long walls of buildings, whether it's going back on a lot or the face of the lot. for the sake of privacy light and new plantings. And we want all of us to, everyone to think about Parking. I don't know exactly what the right thing is to ask about parking. We had asked for one parking place per unit if they're over four units. The Brown petition asks for half a parking place, but we need to think about something relating to parking in the The zoning ordinance. So please share your ideas.

Again, our goal is to hear from you and to figure out how we can make this ordinance better. I just wanted to make the point that I The multifamily housing ordinance, I mean, it's fabulous what we've accomplished with the AHO. We've produced, again, it looks like it'll soon be 1,300 units. The multifamily housing ordinance was never going to completely solve our housing crisis. Remember, it was a tool. So we'll need to be looking at it along with other things like registering our Airbnbs. Apparently, we'll be hearing back about that on the 22nd. Supporting our community land trust. We've just allocated funds towards that group. Exploring alternative ways of producing housing while encouraging our universities to produce more graduate housing, considering the creation of

A private dorm, social housing, other things. So there are so many other different ways that we can also be incentivizing The production of middle class housing. So our goal in the meantime is the multifamily housing ordinance is mostly going to produce market rate housing. And how can we do that in a way that is Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy.

Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy.

Councilor Zusy.

Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy.

Councilor Zusy.

Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zusy. Councilor Zuss Side setbacks of 10 feet for any new housing would make it illegal to build so much of the housing we currently have in Cambridge, including the triple decker that I live in Cambridge for. So a bunch of times, I can reach out my window and touch the house next to me. That is not a 10 foot setback. If you go a quarter mile over to East Cambridge, The vast majority of housing in East Cambridge does not have 10 feet side setbacks. East Cambridge is great, it's fine. I said this to a couple folks. And they say, well, your housing is already built, so it wouldn't affect you. Your house would still be there. To which I say, why do you want to prevent more houses like mine from being built? Why do you want to prevent thousands of houses like we currently have in East Cambridge, in Wellington-Harrington, in Cambridgeport, in Mid-Cambridge, in North Cambridge, in Riverside? Every single one of our neighborhoods has hundreds of houses that don't have 10-foot side setbacks.

I also want to correct one thing about developer contributions. I was looking at OCPF and this policy order sponsor actually received the most contribution from donors who work in real estate, which is kind of funny. I'm not suggesting there's anything nefarious there. I don't accept contributions from developers, but it's very funny that the person who did is also very clear that they're opposed to the multi-family housing ordinance. It's pretty bizarre to suggest that real estate interests are controlling city councilors when you don't like what they're doing, but if city councilors are accepting thousands of dollars from real estate contributions and they're opposed to multifamily housing, well, those contributions don't have any impact on them somehow. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Also push back on the suggestion that I'm not listening to the residents or any folks are. I'm the chair of the housing committee. I have done multiple committee meetings this term. about the multi-family housing ordinance in conjunction with the Neighborhood Long-Term Planning Committee and Councilor Zusy. I spent many hours talking with residents, plenty of areas of agreement actually from those conversations,

Just because I or any other councilor disagrees with the need for some of the specific policy changes does not mean we're not listening. We just don't agree. We had an election last year where multifamily housing was easily the top issue in the election. Seven out of nine councillors who got elected were clear that they support the multifamily housing ordinance. The vast majority of us are listening to residents. I think it's the minority of folks who are not listening to the election results. And the one piece I agree with Councilor Flaherty on, I think developers are in it to make money. 100% agree on that. When you're making a single family home that you sell for $2 million, $4 million, you're also in it to make money. If you're mad about people making money off of housing, you're not mad about zoning. You are mad about capitalism. And that's something we can't change with a zoning tweak. Somehow I don't think what the sponsors are actually mad about is capitalism because I don't remember them canvassing with me for Bernie Sanders in 2020. Maybe they were, maybe I just didn't see them. And by the way, if you want more affordable units, the six-story buildings are the ones that are going to have them. Nine Wyman Street, six stories, is going to have ten affordable inclusionary units.

If affordable units is the thing you're trying to maximize for, you actually want more six stories. I didn't think that was what the sponsors wanted, but I'm really excited that they actually want more six-story buildings. Maybe that's something we need to go back and look at. Last thing I want to say, if someone doesn't want to live in a house like mine that has less than a 10-foot setback, no one is forcing them to. If you don't want to build multifamily housing, no one is forcing you to. If you want to build a new single-family home, you can still do that. This doesn't force anyone to make changes to their own house. What this policy order does do is trying to limit and put more restrictions on the types of housing we can have in Cambridge. It's trying to micromanage what we can and cannot have, and it would prevent a lot of the great, More affordable housing we have in East Cambridge and Cambridgeport and all these other neighborhoods we currently have from being built. What is wrong with the house I live in? What is wrong with the houses that most of us live in? Why do you want to ban the city from housing houses like ours? I don't get it. Happy to send this to the housing committee meeting, but I'm very perplexed by this discussion, and I yield back.

We have Councilor McGovern next.

Since we have two things in front of us, do I get ten minutes?

No.

No. Okay. So on policy number five, look, I've said all along that I would be open to amendments to this ordinance that wouldn't result in stalling housing development. You know, you look at this list. First of all, I don't know where these numbers come from. I don't know why it's 35 feet versus 40 feet or 30 feet. So I don't know where these come from. I'm sure they come from somewhere, but collectively, This would essentially stop housing development and would make housing more expensive because here's the reality, guys. You increase the cost of building housing, which we are already the most expensive, I think, or one of the most expensive places to build anything. And then you increase the cost of building that by putting in more and more regulations and more and more

They're going to charge more for those units to offset the cost that they're losing. I don't think this is going to help with that. Happy to talk about it. The parking, I don't agree with. The one that really gets me though, and I think that this is where you have to dig deeper into some of this, is the explore the possibility of relating building height to Wits of Right-of-Way, six-story buildings only on major thoroughfares. Six-story buildings, we had this discussion for over a year. Six-story buildings is how you get inclusionary units in residential neighborhoods. Inclusionary units are subsidized low-income units. So if you say we're not going to build, and most residential streets are not 55 feet wide.

So if you say you can't build a six-story building any street that's not 55 feet wide you're basically saying you're not going to get any inclusionary units in those buildings and you are pushing those inclusionary units, those low income folks, out to the thoroughfares, the corridors, and not within neighborhoods. And I thought one of the points that we all agreed on was that we wanted to do away with exclusionary zoning, which did exactly that and said, these neighborhoods aren't going to have multi-family housing and they're going to be more expensive. So that one is really, I know that that's about shadows and I think that's what the intent was, but the ramifications of that would be basically saying low-income folks through inclusionary zoning, you go live on the corridors and not in the neighborhoods. That's what the result would be. and I don't think that's really what people want. Happy to send this to the housing committee and talk more about it.

But again, you have to look at this in the totality. This is uncomfortable, right? And there's a lot of, I agree, there are a lot of people really upset. Believe me, I've met with a lot of people. And a lot of this is because It's actually doing what the intention was. The first thing in the multifamily housing ordinance when you go to CDD's page, it's not about increasing affordable housing. It talks about inclusionary. Right? Which is where the six stories comes from. But the number one goal is to increase multifamily housing in all neighborhoods in Cambridge. And so what you're seeing is multifamily housing being built in neighborhoods that are not used to seeing multifamily housing built in those neighborhoods. And that's making people upset. Legitimately, I don't begrudge anybody their feelings. But at the end of the day, You take Wyman Street. First of all, we keep talking about it as Wyman Street. I believe, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, the actual address is going to be Huron Ave.

So talking about a six-story building on Huron Ave sounds a little different than talking about a six-story building on Wyman Street. But at the end of the day, what would have been built on that lot if before monthly family housing is a four plus million dollar home to house one family? Because you couldn't do anything else. Now you're getting 50 units of which 20% of them are going to be for low income people. Look, I met with the guy who lives right next door. I understand from his perspective. You know, he's going to have a six-story building, the back of a six-story building facing him, and I'm not unsympathetic to that. But at the end of the day, would I rather have 50 units of which 10 or 11 of them are going to be low income versus a four plus million dollar single family home? Yeah, I would. So the Brown petition, we have to send it forward, as you said. My biggest complaint about that is what it's going to do to the AHO.

I talked to the AHO developers. New Street would not have 106 units in it. if the Brown petition had been in place ahead of time. And we have to be really careful of the- Thank you, Councilor McGovern.

Who hasn't spoken, who'd like to speak? I have Councilor Al-Zubi.

Thank you. Through you, Madam Mayor, I'll be brief. I definitely know that I'm open to dialogue on this, referring it to committee. I do think part of this is... us needing to be honest between what's on the policy order and what actually is an authentic attempt to get support with the impacts that the ordinance has on development and neighborhoods and also what part of that is just a means to block development. I think those are two different things and if we can have that authentic dialogue about it, I'm willing to engage on that. We just talked about the tree protection ordinance. I think it's super important that we're updating that so that what we just passed doesn't lead to more mature trees being cut down to make room for housing. I think that's something that's moving along.

Another option that we could consider is potentially allowing less open space in very close proximity to parks when we're thinking through housing. Again, I'm someone who cares at the very end of the day about affordability and what that means and looks like. And we're expecting more conversations to come on inclusionary zoning. and so for me like holding that piece of it's going to be really important because that could be at risk and that can also impact how we even navigate this conversation as well. So those are some of the pieces I'm sitting with, but really just gets back to me at the point of we should be centering developing housing as a human right and the way we think about housing, which we should navigate tools like zoning. take away from this idea that at the end of the day it should be treated as a human right and it should be something that we build so that we're not so reliant on market rate forces. I'll yield.

Anyone else who hasn't spoken? I'll just say briefly that it's my understanding that the CDD has been working on a range of amendments based on those two meetings we had. with Neighborhood Long-Term Planning, Melissa's Lawton, you know, I want to recognize that Melissa's still here, and they are going to come back with amendments. And so, you know, I think to the point that was just earlier made, whether that, you know, it's these amendments, you know, I think they will, we'll know pretty quickly what they're suggesting and so I think referring it makes a lot of sense and you can, we'll discuss this in That hearing, we can discuss it in housing committee and have a further conversation. I mean, some of this, you know, right off the bat, I think, I could opine where maybe CDD would be because I think they've had conversations with counselors on this.

So I think referring it and having that discussion at June 25th to see what they've come up with is I think the best route to go. Vice Mayor Azeem, you had a comment before we go ahead?

Yep, I just had two brief comments. I would say that it's just important to remember that I, No inclusionary building at 20% has been built that has not been six stories. And that's fundamentally how we got here. And so if we're talking about a shorter building, it's just not going to have inclusionary. We haven't seen that at 20% in Cambridge. So I just wanted to bring that up. And then I also just wanted to say that I think that The parking part in particular is something that I'm very sympathetic to. We do have to figure out how will we have new cars or new residents. If they bring in cars, what will that impact? It does impact street parking in particular. And I think that the reason that this process is a little bit messy is that it feels like every other week we have something that's kind of brought or talked about of like, here's an amendment and all that.

and we're still waiting to get responses from other stuff which we should get soon right so like we talked about amendments like you know before I saw this I thought we were going to wait till we have that 25th meeting where CDD was going to propose amendments right We talked about parking, and we passed a policy order earlier this year saying that we want to limit, and that is still coming back, and now we're talking about this other way to limit parking. And so I feel like we should resolve the first series of questions before we start bringing in the second series.

So we have a few more hands and then we have two votes before us. Motion to refer and then we have to refer the petition and then get through the rest of the meeting in a half an hour. Councilor Zusy?

So I just wanted to say that I think it should be referred to the neighborhood and long-term planning and housing committees, the joint committees. And I understand that We'll be hearing back about the parking or policy order on the 22nd. So that information will be coming back to us before our meeting, our joint meeting. Thank you. I yield.

So Councilor Zusy is amending the motion to add To the Housing Committee and to the Neighborhood Long-Term Planning Committee. Vice Mayor Azeem, do you have? Sure. Sure, okay. Yes, I have Councilor Flaherty.

Very quickly, Madam Chair, and just so the record is clear, 9 Wyman Street is exactly the exhibit that Proves that the multifamily housing zoning ordinance does not work because as Councilor McGovern mentioned the number one goal is to create multifamily housing But 56 Wyman, and it's publicly available. You can look at the proposal. Nine Wyman has 56 units. One unit, I think, is three bedrooms. One unit. The rest are either one bedroom or studio apartments. Maybe there's two units that are three bedrooms. That's what we're getting out of the 56 units at number nine Wyman. And so that's not meeting the goals that are laid out by CDD or which of the stated goals of the ordinance.

So that's a reason why this multifamily zoning ordinance really isn't satisfying the goals that were set out to accomplish. And finally, and I'll yield, this is a regional problem. And I think everyone recognizes this. This is a regional problem. It's not specific to Cambridge. It's not specific to Massachusetts. It's a national. If we want to make an impact, we should be partnering with our municipal partners and having regional discussions and have a regional solution, sort of like we did with the Green Line Extension. But I'll yield. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Simmons, are you set? Okay, so we have a motion to refer the policy room number five to the housing committee and to the joint housing and neighborhood long-term planning meeting on June 25th on multifamily amendments. Can we do a roll call on that?

Al-Zubi, yes. Vice Mayor Azeem? Yes. Yes. Councilor Flaherty? Yes. Yes. Councilor McGovern?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Nolan is absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Councilor Zusy?

Yes.

Yes. Mayor Siddiqui?

Yes.

Yes. And you have eight members recorded in the affirmative and one recorded as absent.

So policy order number five is referred. We have the petition before us on a motion by Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler to refer to the Ordinance Committee and Planning Board for hearing and report. will do a roll call.

Councilor Al-Zubi? Yes. Vice Mayor Azeem? Yes. Councilor Flaherty?

Yes.

Yes. Councilor McGovern? Yes. Councilor Nolan is absent. Councilor Simmons? Yes. Yes. Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler? Yes. Yes. Yes. Councilor Zusi?

Yes.

Yes. Mayor Siddiqui?

Yes.

Yes. And you have eight members recorded in the affirmative and one recorded as absent.

Petition is referred. We're back to the calendar. We have resolutions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. I would entertain a motion to adopt these resolutions, making them unanimous upon adoption.

So moved.

On a motion by Councilor Flaherty to do that. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes. Have it. Those resolutions are adopted. We've disposed of the petition. We're now on to the communications. Place on file. on a motion by Councilor Simmons to place those communications. There are 93 communications on file. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. Those are placed on file. We have three resolutions. Pleasure of the City Council.

Move the adoption, making the unanimous upon adoption.

Simmons moves that we adopt all three resolutions, making them unanimous upon adoption. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. Adopted. We have two committee reports.

Accept the reports and place on file.

on a motion by Councilor Simmons to accept the reports and place them on file. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. Those are accepted and placed on file. We have no roundtable minutes. We are on to communications. from other city officers. There are two on a motion by Councilor Simmons to place these two communications from other city officers on file. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. Those are placed on file. We do have a late policy order. We have a late resolution by you, Councilor Simmons. So we will have to... This is a 101st birthday to true... Miller, Bacon, and per the rules, we have to require suspension of the rules. On suspension, to bring this forward, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against? So you know the ayes have it. We have this resolution before us on adopting the late resolution.

We'll go ahead and make that unanimous upon adoption. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. The late resolution is adopted. Any announcements from the body?

On announcements?

Yes, we have a few announcements. Point of order? Yes.

Are we under the new rules?

We are.

Because the announcement should have happened.

That was going to be one of my announcements. As a reminder, we'll now be doing announcements at the beginning.

We missed that. No more announcements. Sorry. We'll suspend the rules to do the announcements right now. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. We have announcements. Council Member Govern?

Just one on Wednesday, this Wednesday, June 10th at 6 p.m., a free virtual discussion sponsored by the Healthy Children's Task Force, Peer Relationships in the Digital Age, a panel discussion about bullying, social media, and Reasons for Hope. We have three experts from Boston Children's Hospital who will be presenting and talking about this really important issue. You do need to register ahead of time and you can do that at Bitly, B-I-T dot L-Y slash peer relationships. And it should be a very informative conversation.

Councillor Zusy.

We will have a meeting of the Economic Development Committee tomorrow at 3 p.m. about our innovation economy. Please come. We're going to have leaders of our co-working and lab spaces, many of them here, and I think that'll be a dynamic conversation. There's also a meeting from 6 to 8 at Miller's River about Gold Star Mothers Park. and plans for that site. Then on Wednesday, the Cambridge Community Development Cambridge Learning Center is having a fundraiser at EF on the second floor and at... Street Theory Collective will be having a sort of a celebration of nonprofits. And then on Friday, the play is here. The play will be happening in the chamber about how we came to

become a life science center by decisions made in this very chamber. So come to the rehearsal Friday night and come to it over the next days. Thank you.

Flaherty. Tomorrow, four o'clock, the Ranger Latin baseball team takes on Catholic Memorial in Lynn at Frazier Field. And if you have a chance, you really want to see this. This is historic. The team has never gone this far in the state tournament. They're one of four teams still playing. If they win tomorrow, they'll be playing for the state championship. They've got a great team of great kids, and it is very exciting. Lightning in a bottle. Don't miss it.

And I'll announce that we have the CSI graduation tomorrow here, starting at 5.30, the College Success Initiative. So if you're able, please do join for that. on a motion to adjourn by Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those against say no. The ayes have it. We'll see you on June 22nd. Good night, everyone.