I am pleased to announce that I earned the endorsement of the Cambridge Residents Alliance along with my allies, Councillors Dennis Carlone and Nadeem Mazen, and fellow challengers Mike Connolly and Romaine Waite. The CRA’s announcement states,
“Coming from different neighborhoods and different backgrounds, all have organized communities on issues vital to Cambridge residents, including a community-based master plan, affordable housing, environmental sustainability, and racial justice. We believe the candidates on this list stand for protecting the needs and interests of Cambridge residents, including its low-income residents, and will advance our goals of a livable, affordable and diverse Cambridge.”
I’d like to share a few observations from the 35 or so hours I spent canvassing this week:
1. Most voters, even longtime residents, do not understand how our proportional representation (instant run-off) vote-ranking process works. Some people think they can only vote for one candidate. Wrong! Some think they are required to rank all the candidates. Wrong! Most do not fully grasp the importance of transfer votes in helping candidates reach quota. Quota is 10% of the total votes cast plus one; typically winning candidates reach quota through a combination of #1 votes and transfers from other candidates’ ballots. It’s rare that a candidate is elected solely on garnering enough #1s to reach quota. Transfers are critically important — give your #1 to the candidate you most want to win and then give your lower votes only to candidates you know share your values. Do not vote blindly based on name recognition, which favors incumbents, or address. There are no term limits — members of the Unity Slate have served for over 80 years collectively and have had the majority since 2010. Tim Toomey was first elected to the Council in 1989 and to the state House of Representatives in 1992.
2. Many residents do not know who is currently on the council and that there is only one female councillor (Denise Simmons). They also do not realize that the candidate who gets the most #1 votes does not become mayor. In fact, the 9 councillors elected decide amongst themselves who will serve as mayor. Sometimes it takes a few weeks for them to negotiate it and the newly formed council is in limbo and their work is held up.
3. Most voters have no inkling of the extent to which Council campaigns are financed by the real estate development industry, construction unions and lobbyists — non-Cambridge residents for the most part. Case in point: As of 9/11, 48% of 2015 donations to the seven incumbents on the “Unity Slate” had come from the real estate development industry. One of the Council’s primary powers is zoning, yet these seven councillors see no reason to recuse themselves when they vote on matters in which their major donors have a direct financial interest. Leland Cheung even reported a donation from Anthony Gallucio, a former councillor, on the very day the Council’s ordinance committee was to vote on an up-zoning case in which Gallucio was representing the developer.
4. Some voters ask if their votes will transfer automatically among the candidates on the “Unity Slate” or if they have to vote for all seven members. No! I tell them that in my opinion the Unity Slate is a unprecedented ploy by the current majority, all of whom accept donations from the real estate lobby, to circle the wagons against fellow incumbents Dennis Carlone and Nadeem Mazen (whom they excluded) and challengers like me who express different views on the way to balance our need for housing that is affordable and our city’s livability. It may also be a violation of the state’s Open Meeting Law, which is intended to ensure transparency within public bodies. I was dismayed that at Monday’s Council hearing the city manager appeared to back the Unity Slate by twice angrily insisting that the council must “stick together” when challenged by residents (like me and several others) who testified that bolder action is needed to meet the pent-up and anticipated future demand for affordable housing, namely by voting for a more significant increase to the nexus fee on commercial development (a viewpoint also expressed by Carlone and Mazen). The vote was put off until tomorrow and last week the nexus rate again came up before the Housing Committee, with Mazen and McGovern taking opposite sides. (See 9/21/15 housing committee report.)
5. Many voters stop paying attention to the elections when their children are no longer in the public schools. This floors me. Why stop caring about the quality of leadership on the Council once your children are grown? Do childless voters thus have no stake in the Council’s decisions? Tune out at your own peril and your children’s, should they wish to return to Cambridge as adults.
6. No one except us candidates knows that Election Day (11/3/15) is only 37 days away….
No Comments