City Council - Regular Meeting

June 16, 2025
Watch Video View Transcript
AI Disclaimer: Summaries and transcripts above were created by various AI tools. By their nature, these tools will produce mistakes and inaccuraies. Links to the official meeting recordings are provided for verification. If you find an error, please report it to somervillecivicpulse at gmail dot com.

Podcast Summary

Subscribe to AI-generated podcasts:
RSS Spotify Apple Podcasts

Meeting Minutes: Cambridge City Council Regular Meeting

Meeting Date: June 16, 2025 Governing Body: Cambridge City Council Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting

Attendees:

  • Vice-Mayor McGovern
  • Councilor Nolan
  • Councilor Siddiqui
  • Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler
  • Councilor Toner
  • Councilor Wilson
  • Councilor Zusy
  • Mayor Simmons
  • Councilor Azeem (joined late)

Executive Summary: The Cambridge City Council convened for a regular meeting on June 16, 2025, addressing a lengthy agenda that included a federal update, the fifth annual Cycling Safety Ordinance (CSO) report, and several policy orders. Key discussions revolved around the implementation of Broadway bike lanes, with extensive public comment both for and against delaying the project due to parking concerns. The Council also adopted policy orders related to prohibiting second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides on city property and exploring adjustments to parking enforcement and fees on Broadway. Additionally, a policy order was adopted urging the Governor and MBTA to prioritize combined sewer overflow (CSO) mitigation in the Alewife Station Complex redevelopment.

I. Call to Order and Roll Call

  • A quorum of the City Council was present.
  • The meeting was called to order by Mayor Simmons.
  • Roll Call:
    • Councilor Azeem: Present (joined late)
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern: Present
    • Councilor Nolan: Present
    • Councilor Siddiqui: Present
    • Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler: Present
    • Councilor Toner: Present
    • Councilor Wilson: Present
    • Councilor Zusy: Present
    • Mayor Simmons: Present

II. Remote Participation and Public Comment Procedures

  • The City Council is authorized to use remote participation per Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025.
  • Zoom teleconference was available for public comment.
  • Meeting viewing options: City Open Meeting Portal or City Cable Channel 22.
  • Public comment sign-up: www.cambridgema.gov/publiccomment (up to 6 p.m.).
  • Written comments: cityclerk@cambridgema.gov.
  • Meetings are audio and video recorded by the City and third parties.
  • Public comment rules: Massachusetts General Law 30A, Section 20G, and City Council Rules 23D and 37.
  • Speakers were allotted one minute due to 239 sign-ups.

III. Public Comment

  • Kristen Anderson (12 Upland Road West, Arlington): Spoke on "ending Alewife sewage." Highlighted severe Alewife Brook flooding and raw sewage pollution (29 million gallons in 2023, 51 million gallons in 2021), impacting 5,000 residents in the floodplain and environmental justice neighborhoods. Urged a "yes" vote on ending Alewife sewage.
  • Alexander Polson (301 Broadway): Advocated for separated bike lanes on Broadway, citing safety concerns for cyclists, including his son. Stated Broadway is a critical thoroughfare connecting Harvard Square, the high school, library, MIT, and Kendall Square, and should prioritize safe transportation over parking.
  • Ethan Frank (632 Mass Ave): Referenced Broadway parking occupancy data and policy orders regarding underutilized spots. Noted recent developments like flexible parking corridors, temporary loading zone parking, and increased MBTA ridership. Questioned the value of parking spots versus human lives.
  • Anne McDonald (24 Columbus): Supported Policy Order Number 3. Emphasized a "once in a generation opportunity" to pressure state leadership for a future Alewife MBTA complex that integrates housing, transport, and green/gray infrastructure to address climate change and raw sewage releases. Quoted a child's remark about the "Sewage Wife" (Alewife Brook).
  • Juliana Castedo (44 Cottage Street): Urged "no" votes on Policy Orders 1 and 2 (delaying Broadway bike lanes). Shared personal experience biking with her three-year-old daughter to preschool, the pool, and the library, highlighting the danger of Broadway without protected bike lanes. Stated protected bike lanes would allow safe road sharing.
  • Chloe Lewis (Cambridge Resident): Recounted being hit by a car on Broadway in 2021, resulting in a concussion and other injuries. Argued that safe bike infrastructure increases bike ridership, reduces driving, and solves parking/traffic problems. Emphasized cycling as a safe commuting option for women at night.
  • Amanda Sindel-Kaswick (Linden Park, near Broadway): Supported Policy Orders 5 and 6 and opposed any policy delaying or removing Broadway from the bicycle network. Expressed excitement for Broadway bike lanes, noting the lack of protected bike access to Sennott Park.
  • Christian Tatu (The Port): Urged "no" on Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a transportation economist and daily Broadway cyclist, he described being "doored" by a motorist, resulting in a head injury. Stated that delaying bike lanes prioritizes parking over the safety of thousands of students and residents.
  • David Lawrence (One Aberdeen Way): Commented on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that parking convenience should not outweigh the safety of other road users. Called for immediate construction of separated bike lanes and expressed willingness to bike instead of drive if Broadway had bike lanes.
  • Zyler Sharp (109 Inman Street, 10 years old): Advocated for Broadway bike lanes, suggesting that some of the nearly 1,000 parking spaces could be removed to create a safer community. Described Broadway as a "challenge" due to lack of safety infrastructure. Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6.
  • Julia Sharp (109 Inman Street): Supported Policy Orders 5 and 6 and opposed 1 and 2. As a car-free homeowner with 10-year-old twins, she relies on biking/walking and regularly bikes on Broadway for physical therapy. Emphasized that Cambridge's choices signal priorities, and safety for vulnerable road users and climate-friendly travel should come first.
  • Christina Curran (218 Harvard Street): Supported bike lanes to progress the city and decrease traffic. Described her 18-minute bike commute to Back Bay versus a nearly hour-long drive. Urged a "yes" vote for progress.
  • Cody Scott (Cambridge Homeowner): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2 and "yes" on PO 5 and 6. As a 12-year resident, he and his family make 9 out of 10 trips by bike. Highlighted the importance of protected bike lanes for children's safety, especially for students biking to CRLS.
  • Anjan Devaraj (194 Prospect Street): Spoke against Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that without Broadway bike lanes, his family cannot meet job and school commitments by walking, car, or MBTA. Described biking on Broadway as "terrifying" and that passing PO 1 or 2 would be "devastating" for his family.
  • John Pitkin (18th Street): Spoke in favor of Policy Orders 1 and 2. Argued that tens of thousands of Cambridge residents rely on cars and need parking. Stated that solving a transportation problem by depriving people of access to the system they need is unacceptable without seeking alternative solutions.
  • Rock Lois (Cambridge Resident): Advocated for protected bike lanes on Broadway, citing a friend's injury from being hit by a truck due to lack of a protected lane. Emphasized the need for safe access to the high school, war memorial, and main library.
  • Mark Boswell (105 Walden Street, Neighborhood 9): Supported Policy Orders 5 and 6 and strongly opposed 1 and 2. Stated Broadway is a crucial connection for cyclists and scooters, and students biking to CRLS need separation from cars and trucks. Urged prioritizing the "greater good of Cambridge" and safety.
  • Ivan Gonzalez (Cambridge Resident, near St. Mary's): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a 12-year resident and cyclist, he has witnessed numerous accidents and been hit himself. Emphasized that protected bike lanes save lives and are especially important for children and teenagers due to schools and parks.
  • Ned Melanson (Cambridge Resident): Recounted being hit by a driver on Main Street. Stated that traffic deaths are avoidable, citing Hoboken, New Jersey's zero traffic deaths since 2017 due to lower speed limits and improved bike/pedestrian paths. Argued that "safe streets are a solved problem."
  • Kathleen Pallott (62 Gorham Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Strongly supported safe bicycle and pedestrian improvements everywhere in Cambridge, citing the climate emergency and the need for safe routes for her children to the high school.
  • Nicole Neville (342 Broadway): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a Broadway resident and bike commuter, she witnesses near-miss accidents regularly. Cited city data showing speeding drivers and 40 crashes since 2022. Stated that convenience of some should not outweigh safety of all.
  • Norman Doust (157 Raymond Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Anticipated enjoyable and safer travel on Broadway after protected bike lane implementation.
  • Michael Rogo (65 Spark Street): Stated that the choice between easy parking and safe routes for kids is a "false choice." Applauded city staff and noted that cyclists are actively using existing infrastructure. Urged not to weaken the Cycling Safety Ordinance (CSO).
  • Luis Mejia (18 Plymouth Street): Spoke against Policy Orders 1 and 2 and for 5 and 6. Highlighted climate change, transportation emissions, and the prioritization of private property storage over resident safety. Referenced the death of Min T. Nguyen and questioned "who will be next?"
  • Christopher Casa (103 Gore Street): Noted the dramatic increase in biking, citing a 28% year-over-year increase in Blue Bike usage. Referenced census data showing a decrease in driving to work (35% in 2013 to 22% in 2023) and an increase in biking (6% to 11%). Argued that the work is making a difference and should be built upon.
  • Sarah Catherine Benedict (11 Story Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Shared the tragic story of her friend, Min T. Nguyen, who was killed while biking in Cambridge. Emphasized that reducing severe crashes saves lives and that no one else should experience such a loss.
  • Argenis Herrera (385 Broadway): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described biking on Broadway as unsafe and frustrating for both cyclists and drivers. Stated that protected bike lanes are a win for cyclists, families, safety, air quality, and a better-connected Cambridge.
  • Bernal Cortes (385 Broadway): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described biking on Broadway as a "scary experience" and recounted being struck by a car twice. Emphasized that protected bike lanes offer safety, promote a healthier city, and improve quality of life.
  • Andy Rosevere (127 Nightingale, Brighton; business owner on Broadway): Described dangerous encounters with drivers on Broadway. Argued that 200 parking spots are a small percentage of the adult population and that prioritizing cars limits how many people can be in an area. Stated that parking on public streets is an "unrealistic expectation."
  • Sue Downing (31 Fairmont Street): Opposed PO 1 and 2 and supported 5 and 6. As a lifelong non-driver, she has biked Massachusetts Avenue since 1977. Praised the Cycling Safety Ordinance (CSO) as a "complex process with a lot of trade-offs" and a "gem" that should be continued.
  • David Brand (399 Broadway): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Cited Blue Bike data showing over 200,000 rides starting or stopping on Broadway in the past year. Stated that protected bike lanes will make rides safer for thousands of Blue Bike users and other cyclists.
  • Emma Batson (12 Murdoch Street): Urged "no" on POs 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a Cambridge resident and MIT grad student, she avoids Broadway due to safety concerns, citing 46 people hit by cars since 2022 and the death of Min Tin Nguyen. Stated that the correct number of deaths on streets is zero.
  • Rita Owens (24 Bay State Road): Urged the Council to build bike lanes "as fast as you can" for the sake of children. Referenced the ninth anniversary of Amanda Phillips' death and her experience as a pediatric intensivist caring for children hit by bicycles, none in protected bike lanes.
  • David Lyon (6 Crawford Street): Urged halting Broadway bike lanes and preserving 100% of parking. Claimed the City Council has been misled, citing outdated bike traffic studies and a lack of overnight parking data. Stated the plan is "ageist and ableist" and dismisses safety concerns.
  • Stephanie Tellex (Hancock Street): Urged immediate construction of Broadway bike lanes. Described her scary experience biking with her son on Broadway to daycare. Stated that protected bike lanes make children feel more comfortable biking.
  • Alec Weidman (223 Broadway): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that it has not been a year since someone was "murdered by a car" a block from his house. Questioned if it would take another death on Broadway for bike lanes to be installed.
  • Douglas Baker (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2. Argued that the automobile has been "overly prioritized and privileged" and that bike lane projects bring a "reasonable balance to transportation." Stated that the benefits of public safety and health outweigh the inconvenience for drivers.
  • Sarah Block (Shepherd Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Supported the current timeline and plan for Broadway. Referenced a t-shirt saying, "I just wanted to take my kid to school on a bike and now I spend half my time in the City Council."
  • Joshua Hartshorn (114 Inman Street) and Beanway Hartshorn: Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2 and "yes" on PO 5 and 6. Stated that more bike lanes are needed and that it is difficult to raise children in Cambridge without safe biking options. Advocated for cleaner air and a family-friendly city.
  • Owen Letty (260 Harvard Street): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described Broadway as unsafe for biking, especially at night. Stated that biking is a fast, affordable, healthy, and sustainable way to get around. Emphasized the importance of not rolling back planned safety measures after multiple cyclist deaths.
  • Alexander Dickel (41 Stern Street): Urged the Council to stop delaying and rewriting rules about bike lanes. Stated that continued relitigation erodes public trust and is a waste of time and money. Argued that the city is "weighing the cost of human life versus the convenience of the few."
  • Jerome Ryan (35 Lee Street): Opposed Policy Orders 1 and 2 and supported 5 and 6. Noted 174 locked bicycles at the high school and students' accounts of accidents on Broadway. Emphasized that implementing bike safety measures is about saving lives.
  • Gabriel Grand (253 Walden Street): Urged voting against Policy Orders 1 and 2. Described Broadway as unsafe for cycling. Thanked Councilors Azeem, Siddiqui, Sobrinho-Wheeler, and Vice Mayor McGovern for leadership on Garden Street. Stated that bike lane actions have been "blindsiding" and a "cruel right hook" to the CSO.
  • Alexa Gomberg (Cambridge Resident): Urged voting against Policy Orders 1 and 2 and for 5 and 6. Referenced the one-year anniversary of her friend Min T. Nguyen's death. Stated that the Council can honor her memory by making Cambridge a safe place for everyone.
  • Melissa Berlin (31 Lyon Street): Supported continued progress on bike lanes. As a primary bike user, she and her fiance look forward to raising a family in Cambridge and using cargo bikes, which requires safe infrastructure.
  • Sam Ratliff (35 Howard Street): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Shared his experience driving two blocks to the grocery store, highlighting how city design makes it easy to have cars. Argued that his convenience burdens those who truly need cars.
  • Justin Mazzola-Pileska (22 Chatham Street): Urged voting against Policy Orders 1 and 2 and for 5 and 6. Recounted being assaulted by a driver after a bike crash on Broadway in 2016. Stated that bike infrastructure eliminates conflicts and that he has been waiting 10 years for better infrastructure.
  • Joshua Williams (59 Maple Avenue): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Described Broadway as one of the "scariest roads" he has biked on, despite three schools being on the street. Emphasized the need for safe infrastructure for students who will continue to bike on Broadway.
  • Sarah Stone (Hancock Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Expressed fear for her partner who bikes on Broadway frequently. Stated that making cycling safer is good for bikers and drivers and helps achieve climate goals.
  • Charles Franklin (162 Hampshire Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Referenced a woman in a wheelchair using bike lanes due to impassable sidewalks. Described the difficulty of navigating brick sidewalks on Broadway with a knee scooter. Suggested a PO to remove brick sidewalks if bike lanes are delayed.
  • Miranda Cecil (304 Washington Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted witnessing a near-fatal bike accident. Argued that prioritizing small businesses over bikes is untrue, and that 5 and 6 offer a compromise. Stated that designing for people, not cars, is crucial.
  • Hannah Cordisco (4 Rockwell Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated there is no reason for delay, as the plan was already voted on and public funds spent. Emphasized that protected bike lanes make streets safer for all users, especially school-aged children on Broadway.
  • Eric Grunenbaum (98 Montgomery Street): Thanked the Council for considering PO Number 3 (Alewife MBTA complex). Urged passing it to pressure the state to address the sewage problem with green and gray infrastructure. Stated that the sewage problem should be integral to the RFP, not an afterthought.
  • Nicholas Fernandez (18 George Street): Supported building bike lanes and opposed Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a car-free resident with two kids, he uses cargo bikes and bikes on Broadway. Emphasized that connected networks encourage less driving and are important for climate goals and safety.
  • Jeff Williams (1 Ellsworth Park): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Recounted being "car-doored" twice and having numerous near-misses on Broadway. Stated that he avoids Broadway due to lack of bike lanes and that he would appreciate immediate installation.
  • Eleanor Carlson (568 Franklin Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described being "doored" on Broadway years ago and that nothing has changed since. Stated that every day without changes is a day someone else can get hurt.
  • Eppa Rixey (126 Harvey Street): Commented on Policy Order Number 3 (Alewife) and Charter Right Number 4 (rodenticides). Urged the Council to send a message to the state about ending CSO discharges in Alewife and to strongly encourage green stormwater infrastructure.
  • Amanda Leifer (170 Gore Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a homeowner through an affordable housing program, she relies on biking and protected bike lanes. Recounted being hit by a car on Broadway, thrown into oncoming traffic, and stated that two people were killed within two weeks of her crash.
  • Jonathan Haber (Neighborhood 9 Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that bike lanes improve safety for all road users and that the argument against them sounds absurd when applied to pedestrian infrastructure.
  • Kitty Escrizi (47 Inman Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Advocated for the safety of all road users on Broadway, citing over 40 crashes since 2022. Stated that delaying the project for 200 parking spaces is unreasonable when the first segment only affects 23 spots.
  • Brendan Coffey (47 Inman Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Referenced over 40 crashes on Broadway since 2022, including his neighbor. Expressed fear for his partner who bikes daily and the need for policies that prioritize safety.
  • Michelle Escrizi (Putnam Ave, Cambridge Port): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a car owner, biker, and pedestrian, she feels safer with separated bike lanes. Emphasized Broadway as a key route for students and that safety should not be compromised.
  • Janie Katz-Christy (166A Elm Street, North Cambridge): Urged voting against Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that change is necessary to preserve a habitable climate and that the Council should prioritize this over saving parking spaces.
  • Sam Alon (31 Lyon Street): Advocated for protected bike lanes on Broadway to improve traffic flow and safety for both cyclists and drivers.
  • Preston Mueller (1105 Mass Ave): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted his fear biking on Broadway when he first purchased his bicycle. Stated that Broadway bike lanes would eliminate that fear for new cyclists.
  • Julie Kurti (Cambridge Resident, Urban Planner, Parent): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Shared her experience being hit by a car and a friend being "doored." Emphasized the need to prioritize children's safety, especially near CRLS and Fletcher Maynard.
  • Joe Fitzgerald (Amory Street): Opposed POs 1 and 2. As a biker and data scientist, he stated that bike lanes are safer for everyone. Shared his father's fear of biking south due to Broadway's unsafety.
  • Carl Schmeckpepper (249 3rd Street): Recounted being hit by a car on Broadway. Emphasized that many people depend on biking and that streets need to be made safer for them.
  • Casey Szilagyi (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Order 1 and 2. Questioned if the city is "really okay with putting their lives at risk every day that we delay this project." Advocated for a network of safe bike lanes.
  • Jordi Ali (Cambridge Port): Advocated for proper separation between bike lanes and cars, stating that cones, poles, and paint are insufficient. Emphasized that bikes don't use fuel and that bike lanes should be more common.
  • Arianna Olson (94 Pleasant Street, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Avoids Broadway due to safety concerns, citing a friend being "doored." Stated that more safe bikers lead to fewer drivers and a more pleasant environment.
  • Catherine O'Connor (Hamilton Street, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted being "doored" while cycling. Emphasized that safe streets protect children and that protected bike lanes provide physical separation and reduce speeding.
  • Richard Fryerman (39 RC Kelly Street): Urged rejecting Policy Orders 1 and 2 and supporting 5 and 6. Questioned why the issue is being revisited, citing the CSO's passage six years ago and unanimous approval of Broadway's timeline. Stated that constant relitigation is "not good governance."
  • Nina Katz-Christy (24 Hardwick Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Noted the increase in children biking to school due to bike lane investment. Stated that the city "can't stop partway" and that bike lanes make communities safer and more accessible.
  • Jeffrey Oishi (45.5 Cogswell Avenue, North Cambridge): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that providing safe alternative transportation is essential city business and that protected bike lanes achieve this. Argued that sudden change is "not good governance."
  • Ted Moore (Thorndike Street, East Cambridge): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a primary bike user with a five-year-old daughter, he finds Broadway dangerous. Emphasized the need for separation from cars and clear sight lines at intersections.
  • Catherine Moon (Wellington Harrington): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that she does not want any more delays to Broadway bike lanes. Suggested supporting 5 and 6 as a compromise. Emphasized that more people will die without important infrastructure, especially on Broadway with its schools, parks, and library.
  • Kai Feldman (Gore Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a non-car owner and non-biker due to fear, she knows many people who have been hit. Stated that protected bike lanes make roads safer for everyone and have environmental benefits.
  • Rebecca Bjork (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Avoids much of Broadway due to lack of safe bike lanes. Recounted a dangerous encounter with a driver. Emphasized that bike lanes improve safety for everyone, especially families using Sennott Park.
  • Abigail Starr (16 Richard Ave, North Cambridge): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a homeowner with two kids, she primarily uses a cargo bike. Described feeling "uncomfortable and unsafe" on Broadway and the importance of safety improvements.
  • Robert Ressler (Dana Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that bike lanes connect people, support public health, reduce pollution, and create vibrant communities. Argued that the city should not put lives in danger.
  • Jonathan Frieden (6 Washington Avenue): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a daily bike commuter, he recounted being "doored" on Mount Auburn Street before a protected bike lane was installed.
  • David Halperin (14 Valentine Street): Urged "no" on POs 1 and 2. Questioned the need for so many east-west roads for cars when the cycling network needs a small percentage of road space. Stated that delaying the bike network is unacceptable.
  • Alejandro Paz (Cambridge Port): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a resident who frequents businesses on Broadway, he believes separated bike lanes are a great policy. Highlighted the danger for teenagers biking on Broadway due to high car speeds.
  • Jan Devereaux (255 Lakeview Avenue): Spoke against the two policy orders that would delay or cancel the Broadway bike lane project. Noted that work has already been done, the bike network plan is codified, and the project was supported earlier this year. Urged not to backtrack.
  • Kim Martineau (Former Cambridge Resident): Urged staying the course with Broadway bike lanes. Recounted being almost "doored" several times on Broadway.
  • Jonathan Cohen (22 Waters Street, East Cambridge): Urged not to delay Broadway bike lanes. Described his terrifying commute to CRLS. Stated that road design is not zero-sum and that protected bike lanes allow more people to bike, freeing up congestion and parking.
  • Dana Bullister (Cambridge Resident): Urged voting to finish the safe infrastructure on Broadway. Described Broadway as a vital and dangerous corridor for accessing economic opportunity. Stated that data shows most people in Cambridge do not commute alone by car.
  • Tim Russell (North Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway has been in the CSO for years and that delaying it wastes resources and puts lives at risk, citing 40 crashes since 2022.
  • Hunter Dinkins (Homer Avenue, West Cambridge): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a car-free resident with an 11-month-old son, he avoids Broadway due to safety concerns. Stated that the majority of street space is allotted to cars and that the bike network is incomplete without Broadway lanes.
  • Ryan Grams (Cambridgeport): Urged not to delay protected bike lanes on Broadway. As a parent who bikes with his children, he finds it difficult for them to bike to places along Broadway. Stated that delaying planned visions is frustrating.
  • Jeremy Burns (15 Vincent Street, Neighborhood 9): Urged not to delay the Broadway safety project. Recounted being "car-doored" on Cambridge Street and now avoids that street and Broadway due to safety concerns.
  • Tian-Tian Chan (Cambridge Port Resident) and Izzy (5 years old): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a homeowner who bikes with her daughter, she wants to bike safely to the library. Highlighted the danger of double-parked cars and the need for safe infrastructure.
  • Ken Carlson (328 Harvard Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a 64-year-old who bikes with his granddaughter to schools, parks, and businesses on Broadway, he finds it dangerous due to lack of bike lanes.
  • Teresa Cloutier (10 Lopez Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a daily bike commuter, she has had close calls and friends with concussions from being "doored." Stated that Broadway is unsafe due to proximity to parked cars.
  • Casey Hogle (Fayette Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a car-free homeowner who bikes with her son on Broadway, she finds it unsafe. Stated that the Council already voted for the project and that meaningful mitigations for parking are proposed in 5 and 6.
  • Thomas Henschel (Cushing Street): Stated that Cambridge's commitment to bike safety was a main reason for moving there. Argued that reducing parking and increasing safe bike infrastructure leads to more biking and fewer cars, aligning with city goals.
  • Sam Ribnick (Pulcherson Street): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a 20-year car-free resident with three kids, he finds it difficult to explain why the bike lane process is being derailed. Stated that the CSO has been affirmed by voters.
  • Rosie Jones (28 Valentine Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a parent of students who bike to CRLS and other activities, she wants to ensure their safety on Broadway.
  • Gleb Bamutov (19 Winslow Street): Stated he has to drive his son to King Open Elementary on Broadway due to lack of safe biking options. Argued that bike lanes would reduce car traffic and injuries.
  • Robert Morgan (796 Main Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a car-free resident, he avoids biking in Cambridge due to unsafe streets like Broadway. Stated that more cyclists mean safer walking.
  • Jackson Potter (Former Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that proposed changes improve safety for all road users and reduce life-altering injuries. Thanked Councilor Siddiqui for supporting 5 and 6.
  • Andy Gao (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described Broadway as a "vital artery" for alternative transport. Stated there is no reason to delay the already approved project.
  • Nils Mertens (3 Webster Avenue): Urged voting against delays. As a pediatrician, biker, and car owner, he finds Broadway unsafe. Recounted witnessing Min T. Nguyen's death and stated that traffic deaths are a "systems failure."
  • Giuseppe Ferreira (Western Avenue): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Recounted being hit by a car two years ago, causing shoulder instability. Stated that protected bike lanes would prevent collisions and fear.
  • Bennett Cheney (Sherman Street): Urged supporting bike lanes for Broadway. As a resident with epilepsy, he relies on alternatives to car usage. Stated that Broadway is "probably the scariest" street in the city.
  • Tom Cleland (77 Marion Street, Somerville): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a car-free bike commuter, he still remembers Minty Nguyen's death. Stated that "safer infrastructure now saves lives now."
  • Laura Wacker (Broadway Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a parent of two toddlers, she worries about their safety crossing Broadway. Described cars "flying down Broadway" and blowing through crosswalks.
  • Benjamin Bartorski (Ellsworth Avenue): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described Broadway as "not in good shape" for pedestrians, cyclists, or drivers. Stated that the city should focus on what is possible to improve the street.
  • Maggie Baratz (37 Walker Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that the CSO helps keep people alive, uninjured, and reduces fossil fuel dependence. Emphasized that bike lanes make street crossings safer for all.
  • Carolyn Fuller (12 Douglas Street, Central Square): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a 77-year-old pedestrian, she walks five miles daily, often on Broadway. Stated that streets safer for bicyclists are safer for pedestrians.
  • Catherine Ford-Augustine (28 Suffolk Street): Supported parking on Broadway. Argued that removing parking stresses side streets and denies people the right to own a vehicle. Stated that the Council must consider caregivers, tradesmen, and those who own vehicles.
  • Fiona Wood (204 Franklin Street, Central Square): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Thanked city staff for CSO implementation. Recounted being hit by a car in an unprotected bike lane. Stated that Broadway is unsafe to bike on, despite having the high school and main library.
  • Bill McIverney (12 Douglas Street): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2. As an elderly pedestrian, he fears crossing Broadway. Stated that separated lanes protect pedestrians and that one in five residents walk to work. Emphasized valuing lives over parking spaces.
  • Sarah Wharton (Essex Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described commuting on Broadway as "incredibly stressful" and unsafe. Emphasized the need for safe streets for children.
  • Brian Sousa (20 Elm Street): Urged "no" on Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a graduate student in environmental health, he noted that bike lane ordinances produce measurable public health benefits.
  • Harvey Halpern (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2. As a 73-year-old senior homeowner and car owner, he wants more protected bike lanes. Stated that the safety of bicyclists is paramount and that people can park elsewhere.
  • Chelsea Graham (Recent Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike commuter and car owner, she uses her e-bike to reduce traffic. Referenced witnessing a car accident on Memorial Drive.
  • Luca Govedich (126 Charles Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Recounted daily encounters with double-parked cars and near-misses on Broadway. Stated that Cambridge should continue to lead in bike and pedestrian safety.
  • Martha O'Mara (12 Maple Avenue): Stated that Broadway is a "very unique street" and that no study has been done on putting a bike lane on it. Claimed that removing 60% of parking and a 22-foot cross-section would prevent emergency vehicles from passing.
  • Jackie Gong (Kelly Road, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described the fear of being "doored" on Broadway due to lack of separation. Stated that the situation is uncomfortable for both drivers and cyclists.
  • Itamar Turner-Troring (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Noted that bike racks at CRLS and the library are full. Stated that high school students will bike on Broadway regardless, so it's important for them to be safe.
  • Grant Simmons (6 Antrim Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Described Broadway as dangerous for both drivers and bicyclists. Stated that Broadway meets an unmet need and that encouraging vulnerable riders without safety infrastructure is "irresponsible."
  • Larry Ward (372 Broadway): Urged "yes" on 1 and 2. Stated that Broadway is not as dangerous as other streets with protected bike lanes. Argued that able-bodied people can use other lanes and that parking should not be taken away from the many who need it.
  • Sonali Dougal (79 Norfolk Street, The Port): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2. Recounted a scary experience biking with her five-year-old on Norfolk Street due to an aggressive driver. Emphasized that such situations are common when biking with kids.
  • Gwendolyn Spieth (16 Churchill Ave): Spoke about Policy Order Number 3 (Alewife CSO). Urged the Council to use its power to alert Governor Healey to the urgency of the problem and maximize benefits from the redevelopment of the LYFT station to address sewage dumping.
  • David Wang (Side street off Broadway): Urged "no" on Policy Order 1 and 2. As a car-free resident who bikes on Broadway frequently, he wants to see bike lanes.
  • Nate Sharp (Inman Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a parent of 10-year-old twins, he stated that most family bike trips involve Broadway, which lacks infrastructure. Emphasized that delaying means more days biking in shared vehicle lanes.
  • Paul Recuglia (9-5 Bella Circle): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike commuter, he finds Broadway unsafe. Recounted witnessing a teenager being knocked off his bike by a car.
  • Mira Wetzel (Lower Austin): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 to allow safe commuting to work in the Harvard and MIT area.
  • Steve Boer (330 Harvard Street): Spoke against delays to bike lane installation. Recounted living in the Netherlands with bike-friendly infrastructure and his son fracturing his femur where a bike lane disappeared. Emphasized that protected bike lanes benefit everyone.
  • Jacob Winokoff (276 Windsor Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a cyclist and street parking car owner, he finds Broadway unsafe and stressful. Stated that forward-looking mobility policy distinguishes Cambridge.
  • Xander Keith (72 Willis Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that Cambridge has been moving in a good direction with infrastructure. Expressed shock that the results of a lengthy public discussion are at risk of being rolled back.
  • Ferid Artho (3 Lee Street): Supported building bike lanes on Broadway and no delays. Described Broadway as "extremely dangerous" and recounted almost being hit by an MBTA bus. Stated that endangering lives for a few more parking spots is unacceptable.
  • Nicholas Merle (Cambridge and Somerville Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6.
  • Carmen Baskoff (295 Harvard Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike commuter, she relies on biking for affordability and efficiency. Cited Federal Highway Administration findings that separated bike lanes significantly reduce crashes.
  • Carolee Ron (Larchwood Drive Homeowner): Strongly opposed Policy Orders 1 and 2 and supported 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway is one of the most dangerous streets and that protected bike lanes prevent injuries and deaths. Argued that backtracking is a "poor use of the Council's time."
  • Ben Mazzotta (Standish Street Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a father of three kids under 15, he relies on bikes for their transportation. Recounted his own accident on Broadway that could have been prevented by a separated bike lane.
  • Andrew Tso (292 Prospect Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a non-cyclist and transit user, he sees Broadway as critical for getting around. Stated that the project improves safety for cyclists, children, elderly, and pedestrians.
  • Jennifer Flygare (Cambridge Resident): Urged staying the course with bike lanes. As a daily bike commuter with young children, she understands parking frustration but noted that cities with bike lanes see long-term business growth. Stated that design matters and leads to healthier Cambridge.
  • Aiste Lazowskate (Ellery Street Homeowner): Urged no delays to the Broadway Safety Project. As a parent of three kids under 10, she finds Broadway unsafe due to heavy traffic and speeding. Stated that it is the city's job to provide safe public streets.
  • Randy Stern (12 Kenwood Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Stated that the CSO allows cyclists to safely get to destinations, leading to more biking and reduced vehicle speeds. Emphasized that dropping Broadway from the CSO would be dangerous due to schools and parks.
  • Abby Martin (Cambridge Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that the plan has been part of the complete streets plan since 2019. Moved to Cambridge for equitable streets and the ability to live without a car.
  • Andrea Williams (176 Appleton Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a 70-year-old who has biked in Cambridge her entire adult life, she finds Broadway scary. Stated that intermittent infrastructure is confusing and that consistent infrastructure is needed.
  • Patricia Wagner (Clinton Street Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a mother of two young kids, she bikes daily and worries about their safety on Broadway. Stated that protected bike lanes make streets safer for families.
  • Ari Opsavit (Cambridge Resident): Supported 5 and 6 and opposed 1 and 2. Stated that safer infrastructure is needed for walking safely with his seven-month-old. Argued that reducing street width can reduce car speed.
  • Lauren Kulclich (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted her husband being "doored" on Broadway. Emphasized the need for safer routes for children.
  • Corsel Stark (17 Whitney Avenue, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a year-round bike user and small business owner, she feels safer on protected bike lanes. Stated that the project is already under construction and approved.
  • Zachary Davidson (Cambridge Worker): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted being hit by a car at 13 years old. Stated that protected lanes prevent crashes and improve road safety for everyone.
  • Nathan Strauss (Acadia Park, Somerville Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway is not good for biking or driving and that separating bikes and cars improves safety.
  • Martin Brew (Cambridge Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a parent of two small children, he bikes on Broadway regularly. Stated that the idea of his children riding without protected bike lanes is terrifying.
  • Heather Esme Caramello (Green Street Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Recounted being hit by cars twice and her son being hit twice on bikes. Stated that she stopped biking due to fear.
  • Julia Fuller (Garden Court Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway has been in the CSO plan since 2019 and is ready to go. Emphasized that delaying sends the wrong message and that the project will save lives.
  • Katie Blair (Concord Avenue): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that the bike lane plan has been extensively studied and there is no reason for further delay.
  • Drew Nelson (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike shop worker, he sees at least two "dooring" incidents per week. Stated that more families will be biking with kids, and numbers will continue to grow.
  • John Pervertera (East Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described Broadway as unsafe for biking due to sharing lanes with cars. Stated that he avoids businesses on Broadway due to safety concerns.
  • Zion Sharon (401 Washington Street): Supported bike lanes but urged the Council to view the issue holistically, considering the parking shortage from new construction. Asked for "yes" on Prop 5, "no" on Prop 2, and a version of Prop 1.
  • Adam Mancher (33-year Resident): Did not support the Broadway changes due to loss of parking. Stated that the city is behaving like the federal government with an "ends that justify the means" attitude. Urged "yes" on 1, 2, 5, and 6.
  • Damian Schield (Emergency Physician): Urged no delay in constructing protected bike lanes on Broadway. Stated that he sees people seriously injured from bike crashes. Emphasized accessibility for the whole city.
  • James Kitch (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Praised the growth of bike lanes in Cambridge. Referenced a friend who witnessed the tragic accident of the MIT graduate student.
  • Catherine Nassberg (Cambridge Resident): Urged stopping delays. Stated that two people have died since her last testimony. Recounted breaking her arm in an accident on Broadway.
  • Julian Powers (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2. Stated that the Broadway plan has been in the works since 2019 and that federal studies prove protected bike lanes improve safety for everyone.
  • Frank Settler (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on PO1 and 2, "yes" on 5 and 6. As a daily bike commuter with his family, he avoids Broadway due to safety concerns.
  • Catherine Silvestri (Norfolk Street Homeowner): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that attempts to backtrack on the CSO are irresponsible and a waste of time and money. Emphasized that separated bike lanes are essential.
  • Claire Mathias (Tremont and Hampshire Street): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway is not safe, citing over 40 crashes. Emphasized that cycling is the cheapest way to get around.
  • Andrew Ong (Wellington Harrington Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a parent who bikes with his children, he needs safer pedestrian crosswalks and bike lanes on Broadway.
  • Scott Kilcoyne (North Cambridge): Urged rejecting policy orders 1 and 2. Stated that he cannot bike directly to General Lawrence Park due to Broadway's unsafety. Emphasized the need for safe streets for hundreds of students biking to CRLS.
  • Brendan Hickey (Concord Ave): Urged rejecting policy orders 1 and 2. Stated that expanding bike infrastructure takes time, but rolling back bike lanes happens quickly.
  • Austin Legend (295 Harvard Street): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2. As a car owner and pedestrian, he cited over 40 crashes on Broadway since 2022. Stated that providing safe streets is the Council's job.
  • Seamus Joyce Johnson (Prospect Street): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. Recounted being hit by a motor vehicle on a street without protected bike lanes. Stated that the CSO is a model for other cities and that ignoring city employees' work is disappointing.
  • Faye Gee (McGee Street, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that separated bike lanes on Western Ave encourage her to bike more.
  • Hans Gunther (Somerville Resident, MIT Worker): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Described Broadway as uncomfortable for cycling. Stated that cycling is the best way to get around for people who work in Cambridge but don't live there.
  • Henry Lieberman (Chauncey Street, Harvard Square): Urged supporting the immediate implementation of the bicycle safety ordinance. As a 73-year-old daily bike commuter, he finds Broadway unsafe and has witnessed an accident.
  • Isabella Caruso (MIT Graduate Student, Somerville Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2, "yes" on 5 and 6. Noted that bike lanes on Hampshire have increased biking. Stated that more biking means fewer people on roads and an easier process for those who need to drive.
  • Christopher Morris (Antrim Street): Urged no delays to the Broadway safety project. Relies on his bicycle for travel and learned to avoid Broadway due to safety concerns.
  • Leigh Manley (West Cambridge): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Praised the Brattle Street bike lane and expressed fear of being struck by a vehicle on Broadway.
  • Steven Crossman (Erie Street, Cambridgeport): Urged "no" on 1 and 2. Stated that parking is important for those who need it, but not for the majority who have cars for convenience. Recounted near-death experiences and the need to keep momentum going for safe streets.
  • Sean Kennedy (Cambridge Resident): Supported bike lanes in Cambridge and urged "no" on 1 and 2.
  • James Collins (Former Ware Street Resident): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike commuter, he experiences near-misses weekly. Stated that safe infrastructure is still not sufficient.
  • Lawrence Adkins (Cambridge Resident): Urged "yes" on 1 and 2. Stated that there is plenty of lane availability and that the current approach does not consider all residents. Argued that 40 accidents over three years is not a high number and that the conversation is not impacting all residents.
  • Surabhi Agrawal (Cambridge Resident): Strongly advocated for continuing the bike lane project. Recounted falling from her bike on Broadway due to a strong gust of wind and breaking her elbow. Stated that protected bike lanes would have made the situation safer.
  • Dan Dietrich (Otis Street, East Cambridge): Urged "no" on policy orders 1 and 2. As a bike accident survivor, he finds Broadway unsafe. Stated that bikes should be prioritized over cars and that the city needs to keep people safe.
  • Anna Knower (84 Lyon Street): Stated that Inman Square and Cambridge Street are fantastic due to good project management. Expressed hope that Broadway will be similar.
  • Dave Dixon (Cambridge Resident): Urged putting in bike lanes. Described Broadway as a "free-for-all" and that his children's schools connect on Broadway.
  • Connor Ewald (Charles Street): Urged "no" on POs 1 and 2 and "yes" on POs 5 and 6. Stated that Cambridge's focus on bike infrastructure allowed him to live without a car. Finds Broadway the least safe road. Argued that delaying the project is wasteful and inappropriate.
  • Benjamin Fox (Somerville Resident, former Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on POs 1 and 2, "yes" on 5 and 6. Finds himself commuting through Broadway and feels nervous on streets without separated bike lanes. Stated that delaying construction makes crashes more likely.
  • Darren Buck (Cambridge Resident): Urged speaking against policy orders 1 and 2. Stated that delaying or killing Broadway bike facilities breaks the promise of the CSO. Emphasized that suspending work until a high number of parking spaces are provided is a "backdoor attempt" to end safety.
  • Sheila Headley (Cambridge Resident): Urged "yes" on 1 and 2. Stated that there needs to be consideration for limits on bike lanes. Argued that if roads are shared, excise taxes should also be shared.
  • Ruby Vale (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on delaying Broadway bike lanes. Stated that even as a driver, she feels safer on streets with bike lanes.
  • Miles Robinson (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Thanked the city for the Brattle protected bike lane. Stated that a half-finished plan is not representative of the promised system.
  • Matthias Remillard (16 Winter Street, Somerville): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. Stated that Broadway is part of the CSO and that it is "ridiculous" to relitigate the issue.
  • Joe Ronane (Avenue): Stated that bike lanes would not have prevented his two accidents. Argued that biking is inherently dangerous and that the majority of residents (elderly, mobility challenged, non-remote workers) are underrepresented.
  • Joel Nodgik (94 Clifton Street, North Cambridge): Spoke in support of Charter Right at Number 4 (Alewife CSO) and the policy order for eliminating second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides.
  • Aparna Paul (The Port): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a bike commuter and writer, she finds it hard enough to live as an artist without worrying about injury. Stated that protected bike lanes allow people to choose their mode of transit.
  • David Hattis (393 Broadway): Supported continuing to build protected bike lanes. Stated that existing bike lanes make a big difference in safety and comfort. Noted that protected bike lanes lead to increased ridership and benefits like less traffic and better air quality.
  • Joseph Poirier (87 and Half Sherman Street): Urged "no" on POs 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a long-time resident and bike commuter, he finds Broadway dangerous. Stated that protected bike lanes would make it better for his family and others.
  • Brandon Leahy (Bowdoin Street, Boston): Supported the Broadway bike lane. Recounted living in the Netherlands and seeing how people and businesses thrive in car-light environments. Stated that replacing parked cars with cyclists makes Cambridge more vibrant.
  • Tavor Baharov (Mass Ave): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2. As a postdoc at the Broad Institute, he found biking on Broadway "unnerving." Stated that improved bike lanes are an obvious step towards safety and that he does not want to attend more ghost bike dedication ceremonies.
  • Jonas G (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on PO 1 and 2. Recounted being hit on Broadway. Stated that a separated bike lane would have avoided his accident and others. Argued that voting on PO 1 and 2 is the right thing for a city that values life and urban planning.
  • Megan Finnegan (Albany Street, MIT Graduate Student): Urged "no" on Policy Orders 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a future resident just off Broadway, she finds it unsafe. Stated that it is a public health and safety issue and that the Council should act in the interest of public safety.
  • Mark Van Middlesworth (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2. Stated that Broadway is scary and that the Council is "backpedaling" on planned and discussed projects.
  • Avery Louie (Cambridge Resident): Urged "no" on 1 and 2, "yes" on 5 and 6. As a street parker, he noted that 18 people in his building require an entire city block for parking. Stated that the space belongs to the people of Cambridge, not just homeowners.
  • Ian McGoldrick (100 Memorial Drive): Urged "no" on 1 and 2 and "yes" on 5 and 6. As a new father, he spoke for those who cannot attend, including his son, whose future depends on safe routes to school.
  • Phyllis Brethold (Antrim Street): Stated that she has photographed Broadway with no parked cars. Argued that the negative impact on residents is obvious and that there is no master plan for bike lane development.
  • Heather Hoffman (213 Hurley Street): Thanked speakers on Alewife CSO. Noted a "misimpression" about sewage in basements and urged counting parking in cars for AHOs.

IV. City Manager's Agenda

A. City Manager's Agenda Item Number 1: Federal Update (CM2025-159)

  • Summary: City Manager Yan Wang provided an update on federal issues, including the City of Cambridge signing onto a joint statement with 14 other cities and towns to speak against ICE actions. He highlighted concerns about ICE targeting bystanders, racial profiling, and violent arrests. He also discussed significant court cases affecting Cambridge, including King County v. Turner (challenging grant conditions on HUD Continuum of Care grants) and Newsom v. Trump (challenging National Guard deployment). Assistant City Solicitor LaBianca provided an update on President and Fellows of Harvard College v. Department of Homeland Security, regarding the revocation of Harvard's certification to enroll international students.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Nolan inquired about other financially relevant information or upcoming legal cases at the state level. City Manager Wang stated no significant shifts since the budget process.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Nolan, the communication was placed on file (9-0).

B. City Manager's Agenda Item Number 2: Fifth Annual Cycling Safety Ordinance Report and Update on Grand Junction Multi-Use Path (CM2025-158)

  • Summary: This item included the fifth annual Cycling Safety Ordinance report and an update on the status and timeline for the completion of the Grand Junction multi-use path.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Toner asked about the likelihood of the Grand Junction path happening, given state delays and rumors of other state plans. Commissioner McKenna stated the city is still moving forward but noted delays due to Eversource work and the MBTA slowing down design reviews and changing positions on path-to-rail line distance and grade separation. City Manager Wang expressed concern about the MBTA's priorities and suggested a "sternly worded letter" from the Council.
    • Councilor Zusy asked if the delay was related to the reactivation of the Grand Junction for West Station. Commissioner McKenna clarified that passenger service reactivation is a long-term, speculative project that should not preclude the immediate Grand Junction trail project.
    • Councilor Nolan inquired about the status of the commercial parking committee and permit review. Commissioner McKenna stated the application period for the five-person committee was extended to next week and will be up and running as soon as possible.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Toner, the communication was placed on file (9-0).

C. City Manager's Agenda Item Number 4: Parking Impact Report (CM2025-156)

  • Summary: This item transmitted a parking impact report.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Toner thanked Ms. Peters for the report, noting that only 10 projects had been impacted in the last three years, and the impact was inconclusive. He asked if a surge in new applications was foreseen. Assistant City Manager Peters stated more inquiries were received but few projects had moved forward, suggesting more time is needed for evaluation. She noted that larger projects were in transit-rich areas, and smaller condo projects still desired parking.
    • Councilor Nolan suggested a follow-up report in two years, given the slow development. Assistant City Manager Peters agreed to commit to an update in two years.
    • Councilor Azeem highlighted that only three projects had begun construction under the new zoning, all including parking, suggesting that eliminating parking minimums had not led to a complete absence of parking. He inquired about the possibility of not allowing parking permits for projects with zero parking, similar to Somerville. City Solicitor Beyer stated she would need to research the legality of such a policy.
    • Councilor Zusy requested that future updates include information on AHO (Affordable Housing Overlay) numbers and their impact on parking, noting that half of Frost Terrace residents have cars.
    • Councilor Wilson asked about the pipeline status of projects and why 60 Ellery Street was not listed. Mr. Roberts explained that some projects are awaiting building permits or reevaluating plans due to financial conditions or the new multifamily zoning. He clarified that parking reports are required at the time of building permit or special permit, and 60 Ellery Street may not have reached that stage yet.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Toner, the communication was placed on file (9-0).

D. City Manager's Agenda Item Number 5: Policy Order Number 2025, Number 25, Regarding a Zoning Petition on Maximum Unit Size (CM2025-157)

  • Summary: This item transmitted a communication from the City Manager regarding a zoning petition on maximum unit size.
  • Discussion: Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler stated his intention to refer this item to the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee for further discussion, as the communication requested more input from the Council.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, the item was referred to the Neighborhood and Long Term Planning Committee and placed on file (9-0).

E. City Manager's Agenda Item Number 6: Appropriation of $1 Million for Municipal Housing Voucher Program (CM2025-160)

  • Summary: This item requested the appropriation of $1,000,000 from the Federal Grant Stabilization Fund to the Grant Fund Housing Department Other Ordinary Maintenance account. This funding is to support a municipal housing voucher program, which will fund rental vouchers to be offered by the Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) for mixed-status families. The program is anticipated to cost approximately $1,000,000 annually.
  • Discussion:
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern sought clarification on whether this was a new $1 million appropriation, distinct from the $1 million for unhoused individuals and the $5 million in the federal fund. City Manager Wang confirmed it was a separate allocation for a different population.
    • Councilor Siddiqui noted that discussions about working with CHA on different statuses had occurred in Housing Committee meetings.
    • Councilor Wilson inquired about the timeline for voucher flow and transition. Mr. Carter stated that once funding is approved, the transition would be quicker than establishing a new program, with vouchers expected to be funded by city funds in the next couple of months. He confirmed this would be an ongoing annual commitment.
    • Councilor Azeem thanked city staff for their work, calling the $1 million annual funding for housing "very exciting."
  • Action: The appropriation was approved (9-0).

V. Policy Orders

A. Policy Order Number 1 (Originally Number 2): Suspend Implementation of Broadway Bike Lanes

  • Sponsors: Councilor Toner, Councilor Wilson, Mayor Simmons
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to suspend the implementation of the Broadway bike lanes.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Toner, as a co-sponsor, thanked public speakers and acknowledged strong feelings on the issue. He stated the policy order was brought forward due to a petition from over 1,000 Broadway area residents and hundreds of emails expressing concerns about parking and access. He suggested exploring other traffic calming measures and north-south bike routes.
    • Councilor Zusy stated she would not vote for this policy order, advocating for her alternative policy order (Number 2) which focuses on identifying parking relief for the Broadway corridor. She highlighted the scarcity of parking and the impact of past parking removals and future developments.
    • Mayor Simmons emphasized avoiding "doing the right thing the wrong way." She supported building bike infrastructure but stressed the duty to serve all residents, including those needing parking, seniors with limited mobility, and homebound individuals. She argued that the policy order seeks a pause to consider smarter alternatives and avoid repeating past mistakes (e.g., Garden Street).
    • Councilor Wilson echoed concerns about the 60% parking loss on Broadway, calling it a "real challenge" and "undue stress" for residents and businesses. She questioned why Broadway's parking loss was so high compared to other streets and urged exploring other safety measures. Commissioner McKenna explained that 60% parking loss is typical for streets the width of Broadway when adding separated bike lanes, as parking is typically removed from one side.
    • Councilor Nolan stated that while she appreciates the effort, the policy order represents a reversal of a previous Council vote affirming the Broadway timeline. She noted that the city cannot conjure up 200 parking spots and that the requirement to satisfy parking needs before moving forward would indefinitely delay the project. She emphasized that streets are public property and the Council determines their best use.
    • Councilor Azeem cited data from Cambridge Street bike lane implementation (2016-2018), showing a reduction in pedestrian and cyclist crashes and a slight decrease in parking occupancy despite fewer spots. He argued that people respond to their environment, and a mobile community chooses where to live based on available infrastructure.
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern stated she would not support the policy order, as it explicitly calls for a delay. She recounted her son being "doored" on Broadway. She emphasized that dedicated bike lanes reduce accidents by up to 50% and increase ridership. She supported exploring creative ideas for parking mitigation but not delaying the project.
    • Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler argued that if the city wouldn't make Broadway one-way for cars, it shouldn't force cyclists to use alternative routes. He highlighted the need for safe infrastructure for residents who live on Broadway and need to access local destinations. He also noted that new housing units will increase car demand, making bike lanes even more crucial.
    • Councilor Siddiqui stated that while she respects the administration's concerns, it is the Council's role to make policy decisions. She supported moving forward with the vote.
  • Action: The policy order failed (3-6).
    • Yes: Councilor Toner, Councilor Wilson, Mayor Simmons
    • No: Councilor Azeem, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Zusy

B. Policy Order Number 2 (Originally Number 1): Study Parking Utilization and Provide Alternatives Before Building Broadway Bike Lanes

  • Sponsors: Councilor Zusy, Councilor Toner, Mayor Simmons
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to require the Department of Transportation to study parking utilization of the broader neighborhood and provide parking alternatives before building Broadway bike lanes.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Zusy explained the intention was not to stop or delay bike lanes but to provide relief for Broadway corridor residents facing parking scarcity. She cited past parking losses (94 on Cambridge Street, 30 on Mid-Mass Ave, 3 on Ellery, 90 on Hampshire, 50 on Main Street) and future impacts from developments. She proposed creative solutions like encouraging garages to join flexible parking programs, satellite lots, Zipcar spaces, and exclusive resident parking permits. She asked for data on parking utilization along the Broadway corridor (midnight-4 a.m.) and whether 85% utilization is a good standard. Commissioner McKenna stated that 85% is an industry standard for commercial areas but harder to achieve in residential areas without levers like metered parking. She confirmed that the last data collection for the study was at 10 p.m.
    • Councilor Nolan appreciated the effort and acknowledged the loss experienced by residents. She suggested sending the proposed ideas to the Broadway Working Group. She stated she would not support the policy order because it would effectively delay the project indefinitely if 200 parking spots could not be conjured up.
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern stated she would not support the policy order because it explicitly calls for a delay "until these needs are satisfied." She reiterated her openness to creative parking mitigation ideas.
    • Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler argued that new housing units necessitate alternatives to car ownership, and bike lanes are crucial for this. He also noted that Broadway is dangerous for all users, and safety improvements benefit everyone.
    • Councilor Azeem reiterated his points about parking occupancy data from Cambridge Street, suggesting that bike lane implementation can lead to shifts in car ownership and parking demand.
  • Action: The policy order failed (4-5).
    • Yes: Councilor Toner, Councilor Wilson, Councilor Zusy, Mayor Simmons
    • No: Councilor Azeem, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler

C. Policy Order Number 3: Prohibit Second-Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (PO2025-161)

  • Sponsors: Councilor Azeem, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Toner, Councilor Wilson, Councilor Zusy, Mayor Simmons
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to establish a city policy that prohibits the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides on city-owned properties by city contractors, except in circumstances where a written emergency waiver is provided by the Public Health Department.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Azeem inquired if city staff supported the policy and if it would require significant staff time. Assistant City Manager O'Riordan confirmed that the city currently does not use these rodenticides and is supportive of the policy.
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern explained that the policy formalizes existing practice and was developed in collaboration with MSPCA and other advocates.
  • Action: The policy order was adopted (9-0).

D. Policy Order Number 4: UNICEF Child Friendly City Certification (PO2025-162)

  • Sponsors: Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Wilson, Vice-Mayor McGovern
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to work with relevant city departments to apply for UNICEF Child Friendly City certification on behalf of the City of Cambridge.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Azeem asked about the amount of work involved and the application process. Councilor Siddiqui stated it is a year-long, multi-step, youth-led process involving engagement with UNICEF.
    • Councilor Zusy questioned if the certification was necessary given Cambridge's existing youth programs and resources, and if there would be an expense.
    • Councilor Wilson stated that the certification allows the city to recommit to its young people and could be a partnership with existing youth groups.
    • Mayor Simmons supported the policy order as a way to get more young people involved in policy work.
  • Action: The policy order was adopted (9-0).

E. Policy Order Number 5: Adjustments to Meter Enforcement Hours on Broadway Segment A (PO2025-163)

  • Sponsors: Councilor Siddiqui, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Wilson, Councilor Zusy
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to work with the Department of Transportation to evaluate adjustments to meter enforcement hours on Broadway Segment A, designating 25 spaces as residential permit parking overnight to increase overnight parking access for residents.
  • Discussion: Councilor Siddiqui explained that this policy order, developed with Commissioner McKenna's input, aims to mitigate parking concerns for the first segment of Broadway bike lanes.
  • Action: The policy order was adopted (9-0).

F. Policy Order Number 6: Study Feasibility of Modifying Non-Residential Parking Permit Fees for Broadway Segment A (PO2025-164)

  • Sponsors: Councilor Siddiqui, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Wilson, Councilor Zusy
  • Summary: This policy order requested the City Manager to work with the Cambridge Department of Transportation to study the feasibility of modifying non-residential parking permit fees for households within the Broadway Segment A project area, including offering a discounted rate structure for permits requested by low-income residents.
  • Discussion: Councilor Siddiqui stated that this policy order addresses concerns about parking permits and aims to explore equitable solutions.
  • Action: The policy order was adopted (9-0).

VI. Charter Right

A. Charter Right Item Number 1: Appointments to Half Crown Marsh Neighborhood Conservation Commission (CR2025-165)

  • Summary: This item concerned the appointment of Sarah Holt, Emily Oldshue, and Ruth Webb, and the reappointment of Marie-Pierre Dellensegger, Donna Marcantonio, and Peter Schur to the Half Crown Marsh Neighborhood Conservation Commission.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Nolan exercised a charter right, proposing to refer the item to the Government Operations Committee to understand the appointment process, application numbers, and outreach efforts, given questions about term limits and holdover status.
    • Councilor Toner inquired about state rules on term limits and whether delaying approval would prevent committees from working. Mr. Selden stated that NCDC members are not supposed to serve more than two consecutive terms, and the practice has been to alternate members. He noted that Half Crown Marsh has a bare quorum, and delaying could lead to constructive approvals if a quorum is not met.
    • Councilor Azeem asked if holdover status could continue and what would happen if the appointments were not approved. Mr. Selden explained that members can serve on holdover status for six-month terms, and if a quorum is not met, approvals are granted constructively without commission review.
    • Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler argued that the intent of term limits is not to "recycle people around" and that the process should be reviewed.
    • Mayor Simmons expressed concern about revisiting past issues and the cost of correcting decisions made without sufficient thought.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Nolan, the item was referred to the Government Operations Committee (7-2).
    • Yes: Councilor Azeem, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Wilson, Mayor Simmons
    • No: Councilor Toner, Councilor Zusy

B. Charter Right Item Number 4: Policy Order Urging Governor Healey and MBTA to Amend Alewife Station Complex Redevelopment RFP (CR2025-166)

  • Sponsors: Councilor Zusy, Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Wilson
  • Summary: This policy order urged Governor Healey, the MBTA Board of Directors, and General Manager Philip Ng to amend the MBTA Alewife Station Complex Redevelopment RFP to include eliminating untreated combined sewer overflow (CSO) sewage as a priority, incorporating green and gray infrastructure. It also called for collaboration with MWRA, DCRDH, DPH, and the City of Cambridge.
  • Discussion:
    • Councilor Zusy acknowledged the city's decades of work on CSOs and the progress made. She expressed surprise that improving sewage outflows was not part of the RFP. She proposed two amendments:
      1. Correcting "its" to "it's" in the fourth whereas.
      2. Adding "Greater Boston" to the second whereas.
    • Action on Councilor Zusy's Amendments: The amendments were adopted (9-0).
    • Vice-Mayor McGovern proposed further amendments:
      1. Adding a "whereas" to acknowledge the city's existing work on the issue.
      2. Changing "ending raw sewage discharge" to "significantly decreasing" in the first ordered section.
      3. Changing "require" to "recommend" for a minimum of three acres of green stormwater infrastructure.
    • Discussion on Vice-Mayor McGovern's Amendments:
      • Councilor Toner asked if the amendments resolved staff concerns. Mr. O'Riordan expressed deep concerns, calling the order "premature and overly prescriptive." He questioned the basis for a "three-acre green infrastructure" requirement without detailed analysis, stating that CSO storage should be upstream at Bella Circle, not at the MBTA station.
      • City Manager Wang echoed concerns, stating that the policy order's specific stipulations do not reflect engineering decisions and could hinder conversations with the MBTA.
      • Councilor Nolan proposed an amendment to Vice-Mayor McGovern's amendment, changing "minimum of three acres" to "as much green stormwater infrastructure as possible." She also questioned the effectiveness of "immediately amend the MBTA's RFP." Assistant City Manager Peters clarified that the MBTA is primarily selecting a development partner based on qualifications, not a specific development program yet. She stated that the city will inform what is allowed through a city-led zoning process, which will be the opportunity to incorporate community benefits like CSO control.
      • Mr. O'Riordan reiterated that prescribing detailed requirements without analysis is premature.
      • Councilor Siddiqui stated she was fine with the proposed amendments and that it is the Council's role to express its voice.
      • Councilor Wilson agreed to move forward with the vote, acknowledging the administration's concerns but emphasizing the Council's role.
    • Action on Councilor Nolan's Amendment to Vice-Mayor McGovern's Amendment: The amendment was adopted (9-0).
    • Action on Vice-Mayor McGovern's Amendments (as amended): The amendments were adopted (9-0).
  • Discussion on Main Policy Order (as amended):
    • Councilor Toner stated he would vote against the main motion because it asks staff to negotiate under prescriptions they don't agree with.
    • Councilor Nolan expressed some qualms but would support the amended policy order, noting that it urges the governor and includes the flexibility of "recommending" rather than "requiring." She emphasized that zoning relief will be the key leverage point for the city.
  • Action: The policy order passed as amended (6-3).
    • Yes: Vice-Mayor McGovern, Councilor Nolan, Councilor Siddiqui, Councilor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councilor Wilson, Councilor Zusy
    • No: Councilor Azeem, Councilor Toner, Mayor Simmons

VII. Communications

  • Summary: 174 communications were received.
  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Nolan, all communications were placed on file (9-0).

VIII. Communications and Reports from Other City Officers

  • Summary: One communication and report from other city officers was received.
  • Action: On a motion by the Vice-Mayor, the item was placed on file (9-0).

IX. Reconsideration

  • Action: On a motion by the Vice-Mayor to suspend the rules to move reconsideration on all votes taken, hoping the same would not prevail, the rules were suspended (9-0). On reconsideration, the motion failed (0-9).

X. Announcements

  • Mayor Simmons: Reminded of the groundbreaking on Mellon Street and graduations for Putman Ave. Upper School (1 p.m.) and Cambridge Street Upper School (3 p.m.). Noted 617 Day for Cambridge Local First at 6 p.m.
  • Vice-Mayor McGovern: Announced the Juneteenth event and parade starting at Pleasant and Mass Ave, going to Riverside Press Park, on Thursday at 10 a.m. Noted that Hoops in Health was postponed to Saturday, and the River Festival is also this Saturday.

XI. Adjournment

  • Action: On a motion by Councilor Siddiqui, the meeting was adjourned.

Last updated: Oct 27, 2025

Back to Meetings