Burhan Azeem

Cambridge should increase funding to the Affordable Housing Trust, and the Council should make sure that the money is actually being spent and that there is adequate managerial capacity to put the money to good use. The Affordable Housing Overlay has already added 350 (and counting) affordable income-restricted units, and protecting and possible expanding it are key. “Superinclusionary” zoning, as described in the Envision Cambridge plan, is another policy I support.

Dana Bullister

Cambridge should experiment with every possible way of encouraging income-restricted affordable housing. Limited equity co-ops and land trusts are two models that could help organize and administer such developments. Additional funds toward public housing, housing vouchers, as well as increasing the percentage of required affordable housing as part of inclusionary zoning are other measures that should be reconsidered. We could also explore programs that support and incentivize homeowners in renting out individual units as affordable. Inclusionary zoning also has the potential to be useful in fostering fully mixed income developments. In addition to the 20% already required to be earmarked as "affordable" for large developments, an additional 20% could be required to be moderate income units. These units would be tailored to those of middle income - people who fall through the cracks, currently, in their access to housing in our present system. This would be one way of addressing our increasingly bipolar income distribution. Ultimately, I think we should be open to creative solutions to enable more units for low- and middle-income people to live in our city. We also need to encourage integrated, vibrant neighborhoods of people across the income spectrum so that all have access to similar, largely geographically-based community resources. Cambridge, unfortunately, is a tale of two cities. A critical, though by no means sufficient, step to addressing this problem is making sure that less advantaged residents are not confined to worse neighborhoods with poorer resources, creating destructive spirals.

Robert Eckstut

It all comes down to funding. ABC wants more housing, which I obviously agree is a necessary part of the solution. I favor the 3 and 1 model (3 new units per 1 affordable housing unit) which would bring Cambridge closer to 25% affordable housing. (A goal that is both pragmatic, as well as actually moves the needle as far as the CHA list is concerned)

Alanna Mallon

Now that we have the Affordable Housing Overlay as a tool in our policy toolbox, we need to make use of it as frequently as possible. Additionally, continuing to reform our overly-restrictive zoning code must continue to be a priority. Because our zoning code was written after much of our City was already built, 67% of all existing structures are non-conforming in Cambridge, which makes the creation of new projects extremely difficult. Even the slightest variance must go through the BZA, which is not representative of the changing demographics of our City, and does not align with the Council’s goal of creating more affordable housing. I am supportive of adding more housing through both the creation of more rental units, and expanding access to homeownership for low to middle income families. I’ve always been a proponent of our Homebridge Program, and want to continue to ensure it has the resources to keep our middle income families in Cambridge. However, Homebridge and other home ownership models need to be reformed to both ensure a greater amount of annual equity, and the ability to pass the home to a future generation. Homebridge was created as a housing stability tool, but has not been a tool for wealth building and this needs to be remedied if we seek to close the racial wealth gap. I also support the repeal of racist, exclusionary zoning, but want to caution that this is not a blanket solution due to the persistent high land costs in single-family areas. If we are able to end single-family zoning, I would be the leading candidate to ensure that we partner with our affordable home builders so that they are able to compete fairly for available lots.

Marc McGovern

The AHO was a great start but not the end. I would like to amend the AHO to allow for up to 12 stories on main corridors. I would like to legalize multi-family housing in every neighborhood. I would like the city to build on surface parking lots, purchase more land and limit rent increases.

Gregg J. Moree

Build 20,000 net zero, low income housing units with trees.

Roy Ribitzky

The fact that we are still dealing with a global pandemic means we need to take bold action to address a housing crisis that has existed for decades. People lost work for over a year, meaning people lost their ability to pay rent for a year. I think we should mandate a rent and mortgage freeze for at least two years to buy renters, landlords, and homeowners the time they need to get back on their feet. We must also create Rent Control measures that take into account the minimum wage, skyrocketing rents, and standard of living.

E. Denise Simmons

The single biggest thing that we did this term was to pass the citywide Affordable Housing Overlay District, which is going to make it easier for developers of 100 percent affordable units to build as a right – but we are already seeing some community pushback on projects that would fall under this new policy, with community opponents either mistakenly thinking they can still band together to create legal challenges to these projects, or otherwise trying to exert pressure on developers and the Council to delay or block these developments. I believe we do need to have more of a public education campaign to show what is and is not allowed under the AHO, and part of that campaign does need to attempt to cut through some of the bias and stigma people hold against affordable housing and the people who live in these buildings. Beyond this, I will point to the Comprehensive Housing Plan that I released to the City Council in September 2017, which had a number of policy recommendations that I think remain worthy of discussion and consideration: https://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1914&MediaPosition=&ID=5496&CssClass=

Theodora Skeadas

Cambridge, like so many other areas around the country, is facing a housing crisis. We are increasingly losing the middle class in Cambridge. I believe there are many different contributing factors to this crisis including, but not limited to, gentrification, rising rents and a narrowing pathway to homeownership. Our challenges are threefold: unrealistic and restrictive requirements prevent those experiencing homelessness from gaining services and housing; tenants face rising prices, housing instability, and a lack of protections; and paths to homeownership reside behind a barrier of privilege and generational wealth. Consequently, the lack of affordable, accessible, and equitable housing is devastating for those experiencing homelessness, renters, and homeowners, and alike. At the center of the housing crisis in Cambridge are a few wealthy, multinational corporations that are buying up large swaths of land. The commercialization of Cambridge land contributes to displacement, increased rent, and limits regular people’s ability to buy homes. Additional challenges include an inadequate supply of permanently affordable housing to meet growing regional demands, and zoning laws that prevent increased density in transit corridors. Here are some models and strategies Cambridge should use to create more income-restricted affordable housing: 1. The use of Boston’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Rule for zoning, which will ensure new housing while taking into consideration the effects on local communities that have historically been discriminated against. 2. Support the adoption of a real estate transfer tax up to 6% on new sales of real estate above the city-wide median sale price of $1.1 million and direct proceeds to the Cambridge-only Affordable Housing Trust. 3. Advocate for a vacancy tax on individuals and corporations who buy housing without the intent to occupy those units to discourage commercial speculation- adding additional fees for owners who fail to register their properties as vacant, and for properties that are left vacant for multiple years. 4. Push for community land trusts and publicly-funded social housing focused on permanent affordability, social equality, and democratic resident control.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

To create more affordable housing in the city, Cambridge should expand the Affordable Housing Overlay, increase the commercial linkage fee, and utilize our prop 2 ½ levy capacity to put millions more dollars toward affordable housing each year. Cambridge should expand the Affordable Housing Overlay to allow for more units and diverse types of affordable and public housing throughout the city, especially on major corridors and near transit. Raising the commercial linkage fee from its current amount of $20/square foot to at least $33/square foot would generate millions of desperately needed additional dollars for affordable housing. And unlike many other municipalities in Massachusetts, Cambridge is more than $150 million away from our annual Prop 2 ½ levy limit. Even a modest increase would generate millions more dollars of revenue in the annual budget, a large portion of which would come from levies on corporate landholders and asset management companies. Ensuring that whoever the Council hires next as City Manager is willing to prioritize affordable housing over fiscal conservatism and keeping rates low for corporate landholders and well-off property owners will allow us to generate millions more dollars for affordable housing that we can put to use.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes we should restrict all Cambridge residents' incomes!

Paul F. Toner

Cambridge is well-situated to lead and do more in housing with substantial resources, forward thinking policies, staff capacity, strong public infrastructure, and employment opportunities. We can use our inclusionary zoning and AHO ordinance to support the development of more local affordable housing, especially along major transit areas and around transit hubs. We can also invest more in our affordable housing trust and incentivize more public private partnerships to develop abandoned or underutilized properties. For instance, I support projects such as the one proposed for 2072 Massachusetts Avenue. Instead of having a shuttered business near a public transit station, I believe that a seven- or eight-story building with 48-55 units of affordable housing is a smart way to develop this lot. We must, however, recognize that this is a regional problem. Many of the 20,0000 families on the Cambridge Housing Association waitlist are also on the Boston and other local housing authority waitlists. 20,000 people are seeking public housing in our region, meaning they earn less than 60% of area median income. Many of them will be passed over for housing because public housing authorities are allowed to give “local preference.” Our housing policy must address the range of housing needs if we want to maintain a vibrant community. Advocating on the state and federal level for more resources to support people earning less than 100% AMI is part of the solution. Advocating for more equitable land use policies in the surrounding communities is also needed, especially from our state elected officials, because Cambridge cannot do it alone.

Nicola Williams

I believe in a Cambridge for all residents, regardless of their race, income, or documented status. Unfortunately, Cambridge’s position as one of the nation’s most expensive and inflated housing markets is pushing out Black and low-income residents, and displacing middle income families. According to the recent Cambridge Community Foundation Equity and Innovation Report, there is a $62,000 income gap between Black residents and all collective Cambridge households. The lack of affordable housing has been one of the top concerns among Cambridge residents and the Cambridge City Council has consistently provided weak solutions to resolving this issue. Increasing affordable housing and pathways to homeownership for low and middle-income residents is necessary for retaining our continued racial and economic diversity in our city. My housing plan centers on empowering communities to 1) build wealth through homeownership programs, cooperatives, community land trusts, and innovative down payment programs; 2) create pathways for families that allow them to accept promotions without risking their housing and without strings attached; and 3) change Cambridge’s ineffective homeownership program to allow families to be able to build equity and pass along their homes to their families. We need pathways for transitioning residents as their income improves, so they are not displaced; develop a comprehensive and regional approach to housing and transportation that is affordable and environmentally sustainable for all; and institute rent stabilization policies that incentivize property owners to offer below market rents for stable housing.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. It is absolutely necessary to pursue broad market affordability. In an environment with restricted supply, as Cambridge is right now, it’s in essence a game of musical chairs: with too little housing, prices get bid up and all but the wealthiest are pushed out. To solve this, we need more housing, both income-restricted and market-rate. As a co-founder and former board member of Abundant Housing MA, I’ve worked on regional solutions to the housing crisis. It’s important that Cambridge both lead the way on housing production and tenant protection, and keep up pressure on state government and neighboring municipalities to do their part.

Dana Bullister

Cambridge can and should provide more housing, especially affordable housing. This is clearly a part of the solution in our housing crisis. We should do so using smart urban planning that favors diverse, sustainable, livable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods that function for the wellbeing of residents.

Robert Eckstut

We need to build more housing. Full stop. My own belief, which coincides with ABC (which is why I am very comfortable seeking your endorsement!) is going vertical. The current zoning prohibits this, largely, so I would do everything in my power to change that.

Alanna Mallon

Cambridge should absolutely be a leader in increasing regional housing supply, along with our Greater Boston neighbors. As a region we have created the jobs, but we have not created a commensurate amount of new homes which has exacerbated the displacement we have seen, and continue to see especially in Cambridge. This means that our socio-economic and racial diversity has decreased, increasingly stratifying our City. Additionally, this shortage of homes fuels displacement and ensures that residents must seek housing further and further from the urban core and their employment, and forces longer commutes and single occupancy vehicle trips into Cambridge and the Greater Boston area. Having more available, affordable units combats many of the issues we face in our City: tenant displacement; shortening our housing waitlist; meeting our aggressive climate goals and more, and we must work to increase our local housing supply.

Marc McGovern

We have an affordable housing crisis in Cambridge, but it isn't just a low-income crisis. Middle income residents, including teachers, tech workers, police officers etc. cannot afford to live in Cambridge. We must address all of it, and we do that by increasing housing for various income levels. Density is also better for the environment, particularly transit oriented development.

Gregg J. Moree

More units have to built - with energy and climate change in mind.

Roy Ribitzky

Our entire economy has been based on the mythological “invisible hand” that guides all things from shampoo brands to apartment costs. If all we see are luxury condos being built, or rents going up in one area because maybe in ten years there will be another MBTA subway station there, then the market will inevitably bend towards the rich. To say that broad market affordability “only” will solve our housing crisis is a narrow-minded approach. So long as there are little to no regulations on rent and development costs, the market will always benefit landlords and property owners at the expense of tenants.

E. Denise Simmons

I do agree. We know that there is no single policy that is going to help us attack our affordable housing crunch (just as we know that Cambridge, acting alone, cannot tackle this with real hope of success – we must be a leader, but we also do need a regional response). We need to explore every tool at our disposal: increasing linkage payments from developers, strengthening our Inclusionary Housing program, strengthening policies like the just-passed AHO, adding to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and working in close collaboration with organizations like the Cambridge Housing Authority, HRI, and JAS – we need to do all that we can to increase our portfolio of affordable units, and we need to be willing to be creative and bold.

Theodora Skeadas

I believe Cambridge should strive to be a leader in tackling the affordable housing crisis. One method to achieve this is to increase our affordable housing stock near transit systems and the Mass Ave corridor.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Cambridge has long been a city defined by its racial and economic diversity, and we risk losing that if most housing that’s available is out of reach to working-class residents and wait-lists for affordable housing have more than 20,000 people on them. Only broad affordability will maintain Cambridge as a community for everyone—as a renter and a socialist, my issue is with the phrasing in that sentence from the Envision report that suggests the market alone will ever get us there. Cambridge must end exclusionary zoning, which dates back to the era of red-lining and racial covenants designed to keep diversity out of certain areas. And we need to invest massively more in affordable housing, which Cambridge has the capacity to do as a community that’s significantly below its Prop 2 ½ levy limit. While broad affordability and creating much more housing that all residents and workers can afford is definitely the goal to strive for, the market alone won't solve Cambridge’s housing crisis in the same way the market hasn’t been enough for necessities like education or healthcare – we need to combine ending exclusionary zoning with a robust public response in terms of funding, tenant protections like rent control, tenant opportunity to purchase, and right to counsel, and community responses like CDCs and Community Land Trusts.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes markets should be affordable!

Paul F. Toner

I agree that Cambridge should be a regional leader regarding land use and affordability, as well as the infrastructure upgrades needed to support a dense urban community. How we go about this needs more specificity. Most of the other communities involved in MAPC’s Metro Mayors Coalition have a traditional mayor system, but we can still engage MAPC on this issue. I support proposing zoning that would allow for developing more multiunit housing options in areas traditionally zoned for single family housing.

Nicola Williams

We need a regional approach to housing that will work with elected leaders in Boston, Somerville, and other nearby municipalities to help end displacement, create reasonable rent stabilization policies, and develop a pathway for economic empowerment for our residents. Cambridge must reject policies that prioritize developers over residents and has no plan for affordability, develop a comprehensive and regional approach to housing and transportation that is affordable and environmentally sustainable for all. We also need home ownership programs that offer pathways for families to build home equity and the ability to pass down their homes to family members. My campaign is proposing the 50/20 Plan that will raise our affordability from 14.5% to 20% and increase our homeownership from 35% to 50% by 2040. Neighboring Somerville is implementing a plan similar to raise affordability. My 50/20 Plan will only be achievable with thoughtful, deliberate, and proactive policy planning and execution.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. It is absolutely necessary to pursue broad market affordability. In an environment with restricted supply, as Cambridge is right now, it’s in essence a game of musical chairs: with too little housing, prices get bid up and all but the wealthiest are pushed out. To solve this, we need more housing, both income-restricted and market-rate. As a co-founder and former board member of Abundant Housing MA, I’ve worked on regional solutions to the housing crisis. It’s important that Cambridge both lead the way on housing production and tenant protection, and keep up pressure on state government and neighboring municipalities to do their part.

Dana Bullister

Cambridge can and should provide more housing, especially affordable housing. This is clearly a part of the solution in our housing crisis. We should do so using smart urban planning that favors diverse, sustainable, livable, and transit-oriented neighborhoods that function for the wellbeing of residents.

Robert Eckstut

We need to build more housing. Full stop. My own belief, which coincides with ABC (which is why I am very comfortable seeking your endorsement!) is going vertical. The current zoning prohibits this, largely, so I would do everything in my power to change that.

Alanna Mallon

Cambridge should absolutely be a leader in increasing regional housing supply, along with our Greater Boston neighbors. As a region we have created the jobs, but we have not created a commensurate amount of new homes which has exacerbated the displacement we have seen, and continue to see especially in Cambridge. This means that our socio-economic and racial diversity has decreased, increasingly stratifying our City. Additionally, this shortage of homes fuels displacement and ensures that residents must seek housing further and further from the urban core and their employment, and forces longer commutes and single occupancy vehicle trips into Cambridge and the Greater Boston area. Having more available, affordable units combats many of the issues we face in our City: tenant displacement; shortening our housing waitlist; meeting our aggressive climate goals and more, and we must work to increase our local housing supply.

Marc McGovern

We have an affordable housing crisis in Cambridge, but it isn't just a low-income crisis. Middle income residents, including teachers, tech workers, police officers etc. cannot afford to live in Cambridge. We must address all of it, and we do that by increasing housing for various income levels. Density is also better for the environment, particularly transit oriented development.

Gregg J. Moree

More units have to built - with energy and climate change in mind.

Roy Ribitzky

Our entire economy has been based on the mythological “invisible hand” that guides all things from shampoo brands to apartment costs. If all we see are luxury condos being built, or rents going up in one area because maybe in ten years there will be another MBTA subway station there, then the market will inevitably bend towards the rich. To say that broad market affordability “only” will solve our housing crisis is a narrow-minded approach. So long as there are little to no regulations on rent and development costs, the market will always benefit landlords and property owners at the expense of tenants.

E. Denise Simmons

I do agree. We know that there is no single policy that is going to help us attack our affordable housing crunch (just as we know that Cambridge, acting alone, cannot tackle this with real hope of success – we must be a leader, but we also do need a regional response). We need to explore every tool at our disposal: increasing linkage payments from developers, strengthening our Inclusionary Housing program, strengthening policies like the just-passed AHO, adding to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and working in close collaboration with organizations like the Cambridge Housing Authority, HRI, and JAS – we need to do all that we can to increase our portfolio of affordable units, and we need to be willing to be creative and bold.

Theodora Skeadas

I believe Cambridge should strive to be a leader in tackling the affordable housing crisis. One method to achieve this is to increase our affordable housing stock near transit systems and the Mass Ave corridor.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Cambridge has long been a city defined by its racial and economic diversity, and we risk losing that if most housing that’s available is out of reach to working-class residents and wait-lists for affordable housing have more than 20,000 people on them. Only broad affordability will maintain Cambridge as a community for everyone—as a renter and a socialist, my issue is with the phrasing in that sentence from the Envision report that suggests the market alone will ever get us there. Cambridge must end exclusionary zoning, which dates back to the era of red-lining and racial covenants designed to keep diversity out of certain areas. And we need to invest massively more in affordable housing, which Cambridge has the capacity to do as a community that’s significantly below its Prop 2 ½ levy limit. While broad affordability and creating much more housing that all residents and workers can afford is definitely the goal to strive for, the market alone won't solve Cambridge’s housing crisis in the same way the market hasn’t been enough for necessities like education or healthcare – we need to combine ending exclusionary zoning with a robust public response in terms of funding, tenant protections like rent control, tenant opportunity to purchase, and right to counsel, and community responses like CDCs and Community Land Trusts.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes markets should be affordable!

Paul F. Toner

I agree that Cambridge should be a regional leader regarding land use and affordability, as well as the infrastructure upgrades needed to support a dense urban community. How we go about this needs more specificity. Most of the other communities involved in MAPC’s Metro Mayors Coalition have a traditional mayor system, but we can still engage MAPC on this issue. I support proposing zoning that would allow for developing more multiunit housing options in areas traditionally zoned for single family housing.

Nicola Williams

We need a regional approach to housing that will work with elected leaders in Boston, Somerville, and other nearby municipalities to help end displacement, create reasonable rent stabilization policies, and develop a pathway for economic empowerment for our residents. Cambridge must reject policies that prioritize developers over residents and has no plan for affordability, develop a comprehensive and regional approach to housing and transportation that is affordable and environmentally sustainable for all. We also need home ownership programs that offer pathways for families to build home equity and the ability to pass down their homes to family members. My campaign is proposing the 50/20 Plan that will raise our affordability from 14.5% to 20% and increase our homeownership from 35% to 50% by 2040. Neighboring Somerville is implementing a plan similar to raise affordability. My 50/20 Plan will only be achievable with thoughtful, deliberate, and proactive policy planning and execution.

Burhan Azeem

Addressing displacement requires stability, supply and subsidy—we absolutely must pursue all three. For stability, a condo conversion ordinance such as the one currently before the council, and expanded tenant right-to-counsel, are both key steps that the City can take quickly. In addition, the City should ensure that rental relief continues to be made available to assist in a strong recovery from COVID-19. For supply and subsidy, the Affordable Housing Overlay was an important and necessary step; to build on it, I’ll advocate for strengthening the AHO, more support for mixed-income transit-oriented development, and increasing funding for the Affordable Housing Trust. All of these strategies can be pursued within municipal authority.

Dana Bullister

Cambridge should take measures to support and protect tenants both within and outside of the eviction process. One key element of this is implementing tenant right to legal counsel. While 90% of landlords typically have access to lawyers, only 10% of tenants typically do. Tenants should have ready access to such resources and a full understanding of their rights. The city might also consider providing mediation services. The city can also implement an efficient, easier-to-navigate system for applying for affordable housing. Other online systems could also be useful in connecting tenants with each other so that they can share insights. Such networks and tools can empower tenants with critical information and leverage. The city can also implement flexible, sustainable loan options for low-income tenants in addition to bond programs that facilitate accessible paths to home ownership.

Robert Eckstut

Legislation such as Rent Control are outside the veneer of municipal power - it's illegal state wide, and there isn't much that can be done from a city council seat. However, the 3 primary methods to face displacement are all within the power of a city councilor: 1. Can increase funding for lawyer services to those tenants facing eviction (legal fund, such as Greater Boston Legal Services) 2. Can institute various rent stabilization policies to lessen the harm done by greedy landlords/property companies 3. Inclusionary housing. This is what has drawn me to ABC proposals (again, such as the 3 and 1) since it enables the supply to increase while still enabling low income housing/affordable housing. Those who are threatened most by displacement are naturally low income families/individuals; creating more homes does the most to fight this displacement.

Alanna Mallon

The Tenant Displacement Task Force is a roadmap that was created with the direct input of tenants, to curb the scourge of displacement in our City. There is currently a strong and informed tenant network (many of whom served on the task force), but they need the resources, including direct funding from the City to bring their work to fruition. As the task force report states, we need to develop "a funded partnership with ACT to sustain their efforts to disseminate educational materials and improve individual tenant advocacy skills." We also need to build out our office of housing stability, currently headed by Maura Pensak, who is doing an intense amount of case management for individual residents and families. But we need more funding and more case managers so that Maura’s position can get out from the weeds and take a necessary 30,000-foot-view on what policies are needed so that we don’t continue to overwhelm our department with case management. This includes a “one-stop-shop” for housing stability, like an educational, user-friendly website, a single point of contact for tenant issues, directly combatting Section 8 discrimination, access to legal counsel, access to interpreter services, and the enforcement of tenants’ rights to organize. Lastly, the CEOC has a very popular “Cash directly assistance” program that has been helpful to many of our most vulnerable residents; the City should expand on programs like this (in addition to UBI) to ensure direct funding so that people can stay in their homes.

Marc McGovern

As Mayor, I formed the Tenant Displacement Task Force to address the displacement we were seeing in our community. I supported the increase funding for more legal counsel to tenants, I filed an amendment to require landlords to inform tenants (in writing) of their rights when they move into an apartment and not just when facing eviction. We need to continue to build the City's Housing Liaison division to provide more education and support. We will certainly need permission from the State to do other things but there is much we can do locally.

Gregg J. Moree

We have to build more, but energy efficient, housing.

Roy Ribitzky

The City can place a moratorium on all luxury condo development, essentially slowing the rising cost of rent. I also think the City of Cambridge must explore the possibility of creating a Public Bank, where tenants and landlords alike can have access to low interest loans for home development and rent support for Cambridge residents. Most importantly, we can issue a temporary ban on evictions of tenants that have lost income through no fault of their own.

E. Denise Simmons

I think we’ve started going down the road on this during the pandemic: we increased City funding to legal services to aide those tenants at risk of eviction, we increased funding to help tenants impacted by Covid pay their rent, and we have added staff to assist the Housing Liaison to the City Manager. Even if the Covid threat subsides in the new year, I think we will need to augment this funding and add staff to assist the Housing Liaison and the folks working at the Multi Service Center to serve as case managers and help people not fall victim to displacement.

Theodora Skeadas

The majority of Cambridge residents, including myself, are renters. For too long power in Cambridge has been skewed in favor of wealthy developers and private interests. This has contributed to rising rental costs and a lack of protections for tenants. We need immediate action to lower the rent and prevent mass evictions while planning for long-term housing stability. For municipal solutions: 1. Push for community land trusts and publicly-funded social housing focused on permanent affordability, social equality, and democratic resident control. 2. Establish a Tenant Bill of Rights including a tenant’s right to counsel. 3. Push the city to establish a Department of Housing Stability to help residents navigate existing city resources and find and maintain stable, safe, and affordable housing. For statewide solutions: 1. Develop and advocate for policies at the city and state levels that prevent displacement and set goals for the amount and mix of market and non-market housing. 2. Fight for rent control by working with advocates in Cambridge, neighboring cities and across the state to lift the ban.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Cambridge should create an Office of Housing Stability as a one-stop shop to help tenants with legal and housing search issues in all of Cambridge’s most spoken languages, help lead policy work at the local and state levels, and collect data on housing in Cambridge including construction, cost, eviction, and displacement data to help guide policy-making. While some of this work currently exists, Cambridge should follow the lead of Boston and Somerville in creating a single-office to guide all the different aspects and provide a clear, initial point of access for residents. I’ve worked with the lead sponsor, Mayor Siddiqui, on a Condo Conversion Ordinance, which would be among the most important new tenant protections passed by Cambridge in years. It would provide eviction protections, a right to purchase, and relocation assistance of $10-15k to tenants who can not purchase in buildings that are being converted from rental apartments to condos, which would be a huge assist to tenants to find a home in Cambridge. Additionally, given how much Massachusetts limits the authority of individual municipalities on tenant protections, we must work with cities and towns across the state to pass them statewide. Anti-displacement measures including rent control, just cause eviction, and tenant opportunity to purchase (TOPA) are tools that Cambridge desperately needs, and we should work together with advocates in municipalities across Massachusetts to pass them here.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes we should exercise municipal authority!

Paul F. Toner

To help prevent displacement, I believe the City should support and expand upon the recommendations in the mayor’s report. Education of tenants, streamlining and coordinating tenant services, increased funding for vouchers and providing access to legal counsel and mediation programs to tenants are all essential. In addition, we must ensure there are adequate rent subsidies, especially during crisis situations like the pandemic.

Nicola Williams

I believe that housing is a human right and policies in Cambridge should reflect that. Our city should develop policy focused on creating housing, retaining housing, and improving housing stability for low and middle-income constituents, including the unhoused and essential workers such as nurses, teachers, first responders and social workers. The policies and actions that can be developed under existing municipal powers include: Building new forms of social housing such as limited-equity co-ops and land trusts. Building publicly financed social housing on underutilized city-owned lots, and on top of municipal properties, such as certain libraries and municipal buildings. Supporting tenants’ right of first refusal for condo conversions. Enacting a Housing First policy to address homelessness, which has a low barrier to entry, provides supportive services, and does not require people experiencing homelessness to graduate through a series of programs or address behavioral health issues before they can access housing. This can include, but is not exclusive to, permanent supportive housing models. Supporting better home ownership programs for marginalized groups and the underserved in order to build equity. Revamping our Homebridge program and replacing it with an affordable down payment program that offers the owner the opportunity to build equity and pass the property down to their children. Expanding partnership with major Cambridge corporations, universities, institutions and developers in providing funds for low and middle income housing. My vision is for the investment to be 300 million dollars over the next 19 years.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. Housing policy is climate policy. This means reforming out-of-touch policies so that green, smart housing can be built. Building dense housing in Cambridge means less sprawling, carbon-intensive suburban development, fewer vehicle miles traveled, and more use of transit and active transportation (and, by reducing commute times, increases quality of life). Another, under-appreciated, aspect of this is that this policy gives the City the ability to ensure that even more units of housing are fully electric and decarbonized, again assisting in meeting our climate goals.

Dana Bullister

Assuming we exercise appropriate urban planning and strategic design, especially around transit hubs, density can be used as a means to increase efficiency and sustainability. We certainly have an obligation to provide housing in a way that is optimally responsible to the environment. Such planning should also be implemented to enable good quality of life and complemented by effective transportation infrastructure.

Robert Eckstut

I mentioned going vertical in a previous answer; it's the most logical step. I love population density - otherwise I wouldn't have chosen to live in a city, obviously... The benefits are pretty sizable. Big boon to both climate as well as housing issues with very few drawbacks.

Alanna Mallon

Study after study shows that housing and the environment is NOT a binary conversation, and this is a point that I made often when I encountered opposition to the Affordable Housing Overlay on environmental grounds. Just one unit of (affordable) housing reduces as much carbon as 450 trees due to reduced traffic, reduced waste, and reduced resources that a suburban, single-family home will require. When developments are proposed, it’s often on existing heat-islands that are dilapidated lots or surface parking - redevelopment of these areas, which include landscaping plans, allows both the creation of new housing and mixed-use spaces, as well as the conversion of these lots from gray to green. Furthermore, traffic studies indicate that 80% of traffic in Cambridge is “through-traffic”, meaning that there is a significant population of people who are required to get in their cars and drive through Cambridge in order to get to jobs, our world-class universities, or our City’s vibrant restaurant, arts, and social scene. If you plan for dense, walkable, mixed-use development that’s built around a single community, the amount of through traffic will decrease. The “5 minute neighborhood” is a concept that we should consider in all developments in Cambridge, both to build a better City and to cut down on our carbon emissions.

Marc McGovern

Vehicle emissions are a major factor in damaging our environment. By increasing housing density so more people can live near where they work, we reduce the need for cars and thus vehicle emissions. It is really not that difficult a concept to understand, yet so many who are concerned about climate change also oppose density. I'm not one of them.

Gregg J. Moree

Yes, I support the project @ 2072 Mass Ave, but build it union.

Roy Ribitzky

Unsure to be honest; however, if most climate experts agree on this strategy then I will support what the science says. My uncertainty stems from Cambridge being as populated as it is, I am not sure how an influx of people helps combat climate change. Are there noticeable changes to our emissions when thousands of college students return every fall season? I am not sure. The goal should be to make Cambridge more affordable, allow for greater access to (good) public transportation, and institute a livable wage minimum.

E. Denise Simmons

Yes, I do believe we have this obligation. If we were to look at buildings like Market Central, for example: here we have a 19 floor building that is right in the heart of Central Square, that is along major public transit lines, and that does not provide parking spaces for all tenants (and for those tenants that do wish to have parking, they must pay a premium) – buildings like this speak to those people who want to live in the city, live near where they work, and who wish to live in a building that will allow them to dispense with owning a vehicle so that they can take public transit, or they can walk or bicycle to work. I think developments like this are imperative for our city going forward.

Theodora Skeadas

I believe that climate, housing and transportation policies are extremely intersectional, so we cannot work on each of these in a vacuum. I believe that greater density does have a meaningful impact in lowering our carbon footprint, and therefore is a climate solution.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Creating more affordable housing in Cambridge is a climate issues and also an economic and racial equity issue and a labor issue. Right now, many working-class people spend hours each week commuting to and from their jobs in Cambridge because they can not afford to live here. And thousands of Cambridge residents have been priced out of their homes and displaced to other communities even as they continue to commute here for work. That means greater emissions produced by people to get to Cambridge, and it also means workers have extra hours stuck in traffic and less time with their families or to get to a doctor’s appointment. Ending exclusionary zoning and taxing big corporations to create new public and affordable housing both reduces emissions and allows workers who are getting priced out of Cambridge – custodians, social workers, teachers, and others – to live here, to have access to Cambridge’s parks, schools, and libraries, and to spend hours less commuting each week. Municipal Green New Deal policies like improving public transit and transportation are also key to addressing climate change. Making it easier to get around by bus, subway, bike or foot both reduces emissions and makes it easier for residents who can not afford a car to get around the city. We can do this by adding bus and bike lanes, eliminating fares that add burdens for low-income residents and delay travel time (especially for bus travel where fares are collected as riders board) and investing in municipal sidewalk snow removal.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes that black holes have extremely low emissions!

Paul F. Toner

I agree that increasing urban density is an important tool to combat climate change on the city level.

Nicola Williams

Cambridge holds a moral obligation to develop a comprehensive and regional approach to housing and transportation that is affordable and environmentally sustainable for all while also ensuring that we have a green contract for every new residential and commercial development affordably. Urban infill is a great tool in increasing the supply of housing but it’s implementation doesn’t lead to addressing climate change and preserving our environment. Urban infill is useful for decreasing travel times but when it comes to reducing carbon emissions it's not as beneficial because it doesn’t cut out that much driving especially without expanding on public transport as an alternative. That is why, expanding the use of urban infills must be concurrent with the expansion of public transit and reimagining public transportation in a more accessible, safer and greener way. This issue cannot be addressed by Cambridge alone. That’s why I’m committed to working with municipal leaders in neighboring cities to create a regional approach around transportation. We need to invest in our transportation to disincentivize the unnecessary use of cars. More and more options for affordable housing are being moved further away from job centers, and as a result, low income residents suffer from the large costs for transit. Developing partnerships between transit-oriented development and its users would benefit both the MTBA and nearby riders.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. I fully and enthusiastically support the proposal at 2072 Mass Ave. We need to make it clear that the AHO is a floor, not a ceiling, on what should be built. We need to consider expanding AHO options along key transit corridors, and to implement superinclusionary as defined under Envision.

Dana Bullister

After learning more about this development, it is clear the project embodies productive planning best practices in being located near a transit hub (walking distance from the Porter Square MBTA) in addition to sustainable building design. If elected, I will work to update legacy setback and height requirements to match with current realities of building norms and character, rather than outdated theoretical standards, such to enable smoother and more streamlined permitting processes. I'll also explore additional mechanisms for enabling responsibly designed affordable housing outside of the AHO. Additionally I will advocate for increased and higher quality alternative transit, including bike lanes and busing, which would increase opportunities for transit-oriented affordable housing.

Robert Eckstut

Seems like the path to success is predicated upon who is in a position to vote on these proposals. If you have the right people in office, more of these proposals will succeed.

Alanna Mallon

I strongly support this project, and have been devastated to see the delays at the BZA and the neighborhood opposition. 350 units is impressive, but still a drop in the bucket compared to the 20,000 families who are desperate for housing in our City. The project that has been proposed for 2072 Mass Ave is exactly what we all hope for: a fully affordable development with a high percentage of family sized units, transit oriented, passive house standard with small ground floor retail right on a transit corridor and close to neighborhood amenities and a great elementary school. The fact that it has met with this much opposition from the BZA and the neighbors is precisely why we passed the AHO. But in this case the AHO was weaponized as a reason to not allow the proposed height along Mass Ave. One step we need to take to ensure buildings like this get built, is to take a serious look at the makeup of the BZA and their purview to stop projects like this that meet so many Council goals. Number one is the creation of affordable housing, while another pressing goal is to mitigate the effects of climate change, which projects like this will.

Marc McGovern

I have been very outspoken in support of this project, including testifying at BZA hearings, writing an op-ed in the paper and organizing residents. This project checks all the boxes. 100% affordable, family sized units. Passive House construction. Green roof. Transit oriented. It should serve as a model. What is frustrating is that it is being stopped by an unelected board that is not representative of the community. We need to address the lack of representation on our board and commissions, we need to amend the AHO to allow for greater height on main corridors as of right.

Gregg J. Moree

i support the project 0n 2072 Mass Ave, but build it union.

Roy Ribitzky

No proposal is perfect, but if we are able to create more affordable housing options, we should do it. Cities across the country will pull all-nighters creating slideshows to convince the Amazons of the world to build warehouses and offices there, why can’t we do all that we can to create better housing options now? If elected, I will seek to make affordable housing the priority over commercial and luxury living development.

E. Denise Simmons

I do support this proposal, and I hope it moves forward. As I said in an earlier response, I think we do need to develop some sort of public educational campaign, and something that pushes back against the “housing for me, but not for thee” attitude that we’ve seen from too many members of our community. When people are stating that they oppose a project because it may ruin their skyline or it may cast shadows, or because they don’t want “poor people” to move in and change the character of the neighborhood, that’s a problem for me because for them, this is all very abstract, and for me, it represents the hope of affordable housing and the chance to stay in this community for people who otherwise are going to be forced out. In addition to participating in this type of education campaign, or perhaps a PR push for this type of housing, I will continue to use my position on the council to strongly urge the Planning Board and the members of the community to be more open to these desperately needed projects.

Theodora Skeadas

I support both the Affordable Housing Overlay and the affordable housing proposal at 2072 Mass Ave. As a City Councillor I would prioritize projects that are focused around transit corridors. Also I will engage all relevant stakeholders, including residents, city departments, tenant organizations, and trade unions, to prepare a long-term, equitable plan for affordable housing projects.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

I was a co-sponsor of the 100% Affordable Housing Overlay, which was designed to be a “floor” for affordable housing in Cambridge, and I support the 2072 Massachusetts Ave proposal. The proposed affordable housing, which is a five-minute walk from the Porter Square T stop and on the already dense and walkable corridor of Mass Ave, is a great place for more transit-oriented affordable housing. I’ve been disappointed to see the BZA suggest that the Affordable Housing Overlay should instead be a “ceiling” over which it may not approve affordable housing proposals. I support expanding the Affordable Housing Overlay to encompass more proposals like this and passing charter reforms to provide City Council oversight of appointments to Boards and Commissions, which are currently unilaterally appointed by the unelected City Manager—unlike how appointments are made in many other municipalities.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate asks: why does the 9-story proposal, the largest affordable housing proposal, not simply eat the other affordable housing proposals?

Paul F. Toner

I support the 2072 Mass Ave proposal; however, I do think there should be some limited number of parking spots offered onsite along with a plan to incentivize future tenants to go car free such as reduced rents, access to bike and car sharing services on site, etc. I think it would go a long way to reducing neighborhood opposition on this and similar proposals. Asserting that future tenants will not own cars without some guarantees to assure they won’t only damages the credibility of developers with neighbors. In addition, some number of tenants will need parking to get to their jobs that may not be easily accessible by public transportation.

Nicola Williams

First and foremost, I support housing development projects that offer affordable housing options. I do not support this project in its current form. It is not family friendly with small units and one elevator for over 200 residents. I also feel its scale and density is too vast for the location. There have been accidents at the corner of Mass Ave and Walden Street, including a death. Also, the quality of life of our vulnerable seniors next door to the building would be affected with less shade and less privacy.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. As indicated earlier, broad market affordability is necessary to meet our goals of ensuring an affordable Cambridge, limiting displacement, and reducing emissions and car use. None of this is possible without having small-scale multi-family legal to build, by-right, across the City.

Dana Bullister

I support updating zoning rules and dimensional standards to allow small-scale multi-family housing such as triple-deckers, four-plexes, and six-plexes. Such buildings complement existing neighborhoods and add flexible living options for families.

Robert Eckstut

This just seems like a no-brainer to me. City wide zoning code is 50+ years in the past. It's time to elect new leadership who will go through antiquated zoning code and make wide-scale changes.

Alanna Mallon

There is no reason why certain types of housing should be labeled as “undesirable” for certain areas of the City. Families come in all shapes and sizes, and demographic trends are showing increasing preferences for proximity to mixed-use developments and urban centers. We still have room in our City to create more units, and single-family zoning in an urban area is a relic of a racist past where excluding certain types of housing was synonymous with excluding certain types of people. We are not, nor should we be, that kind of City, and we need to align our zoning code with our values.

Marc McGovern

The majority of our housing couldn't be built today. It is unconscionable that there are neighborhoods were multi-family housing cannot be built. It is zoning that is rooted in racism and classism. Cambridge is losing middle income families. Families who want a home but can't afford one in Cambridge. By allowing smaller homes to be built, that will be less expensive because of their size, we open new opportunities for people to stay in Cambridge. More housing is what we need.

Gregg J. Moree

We need more housing.

Roy Ribitzky

What worked 100 years ago might not work today. We must ensure that zoning laws and practices rooted in discrimination are replaced with better and more equitable laws and ordinances to make Cambridge more welcoming, inclusive, and affordable.

E. Denise Simmons

I often say that Cambridge isn't creating any new land upon which we can build housing, so what choice do we have but to re-visit existing policies and ensure that we have the wisest laws and policies governing what we can do with the land we have? We need to ensure we're not leaving laws in place that make it unduly difficult to utilize land and develop new housing units where we can.

Theodora Skeadas

Yes, I believe it is time for Cambridge to update its zoning laws. In the process of updating zoning, we must center equity and include provisions to push back against the displacement of Black and Brown residents. I also plan on focusing on reforming zoning standards to make it easier for homeowners to make small property modifications and better accommodate the needs of multigenerational households.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

The triple-decker I live in, which was built several decades ago, is currently illegal to build in much of the city. In multiple zoning districts, the zoning currently prohibits anything except a single-family home or duplex, which bans any new triple-deckers or apartment buildings. And even in my neighborhood, which on paper allows multi-family housing under the current zoning, my apartment likely couldn’t be built today because the set-back and minimum lot-size requirements prohibit it. The median cost of a single-family home in Cambridge is more than $1.7 million according to the City’s data, which is out of the range of the vast majority of people in Cambridge. Yet the City’s zoning encourages existing housing—including more affordable triple-deckers and apartments—to be torn down and replaced with large and expensive single-unit houses. We need to instead encourage more affordable types of housing, including six-plexes and beyond, in areas where it is currently possible to build mostly expensive single-unit housing.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate supports solar plexes!

Paul F. Toner

I believe the city council should discuss making changes to zoning rules to allow for the development of multiunit housing in areas that have been traditionally zoned as single-family housing only. I think we have some great examples of thoughtfully done denser housing on formerly single-family lots, and we should highlight these as models throughout the city.

Nicola Williams

I would like to increase our affordable housing in Cambridge from 14.5% to 20% by 2040. In order to achieve those goals, we need to increase housing density. I also support increasing affordable housing with existing housing stock to offer a tax break to landlords for offering below market rents.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. Off-street parking requirements take up land that could be put to far better uses, and they increase the cost of building housing. A Brookings estimate found that structured parking (such as in a parking garage) can add more than $50,000 per space.

Dana Bullister

New off-street parking should not be a requirement in all cases, since it does not make sense specifically for developments near major transit hubs. This is especially true as part of major corridors like Central Square.

Robert Eckstut

Another pretty clear/level headed push. Helps create more space for housing and also combats the use of cars from an indirect position. Love it.

Alanna Mallon

Requiring parking minimums is antithetical to the City Council climate, vision zero, and other stated goals. Parking takes valuable land away from lots that could be turned into housing, and encourages the use of cars in our City when we should be focusing on transit-oriented development. Additionally, after a survey of lots in the Greater Boston Area, a study found that 30% of all spots in the City were unused. In order to meet our housing goals, as well as our climate goals, we should work toward eliminating parking minimums for new residential development.

Marc McGovern

Parking is not only expensive, taking funds away from the creation of units, it also takes up space, often on small lots, and encourages people to own cars, adding to our climate crisis. We need to start transitioning to a new way of thinking about transportation. Cambridge is well served by public transit and we are continuing to expand our bike infrastructure. Although these may not be options for everyone, they are options for many and we need to not only change infrastructure but our way of thinking.

Gregg J. Moree

I support parking for new residential development.

Roy Ribitzky

I’ve seen plenty of apartments and home where parking was built on the first floor and the units above. If we are also to encourage more biking, walking, and public transportation use, we must eliminate the need for off-street parking. This to me is a no-brainer.

E. Denise Simmons

I generally do. With policies like the AHO, we are actively pushing for new housing to be located on or near mass transit sites. We know that adding off-street parking dramatically increases costs for new developments, and we really do need to be making a concerted effort to encourage people to use our buses, subways, and bike-shares.

Theodora Skeadas

Yes I believe we should decouple parking from residential development.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

A recent study by the Boston area’s Metropolitan Area Planning Council shows that the average parking spot for new housing costs more than $15,000 to create and 30% of those spaces go unused. Every dollar and square foot that the City requires go to parking is money and space that is not going to affordable housing, green space, or community space. Adding new parking also encourages new residents and workers to contribute to traffic in Cambridge, which is already among the worst in the country. Cambridge should end mandatory parking minimums for all new housing and commercial development. Cambridge should also institute parking maximums for new development—especially near public transit—to avoid proposals like the new development above South Station in Boston, which will add hundreds of new parking spaces above the biggest public-transit hub in all of New England.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes we should start requiring off-street parks!

Paul F. Toner

I think that new developments should provide some parking. Asserting that new tenants will not have cars without any guarantees or a plan for mitigating parking issues leaves developers open to criticism and distrust of the neighbors. The reality is for the near future, people are going to drive cars. In addition, where low-income Cambridge residents work and how they get there must be considered. Highly educated people have more options to live and work in a way that supports less reliance on cars. A few years ago in a public meeting about the Frost Terrace Apartments, the use of Leslie’s parking in Porter Square was raised. The developer recognized that in his experience a certain percentage of low-income households needed cars. We should study how reduced and no on-site parking has impacted the surrounding neighborhoods for different property types (rental, ownership, market, affordable). We should also partner with housing developers to create incentives for tenants of new apartments to forgo car ownership – rent discounts, subsidies for zip car, e-bikes/blue bikes, T Passes, etc. I think everything should be on the table, including prohibiting access to parking permits when we are supporting increased density near transit hubs if it meets legal scrutiny.

Nicola Williams

As an environmentalist, I support minimizing the use of parking as much as possible for open space. Space is a big factor for new housing development, especially denser affordable housing. Parking takes up a large amount of land as most of Cambridge relies on their cars as opposed to public transportation. Balancing the amount of units with available parking and open spaces is challenging but should be at the forefront of planning when increasing affordable housing. We also need to make sure that we understand the needs of the constituents needing subsidized housing. I think it is imperative that a survey be done to assess the work schedules and reliability of public transportation. Unlike New York City, the Boston area does not have 24 hour transit services and from my grassroots experience, many of our low income and BIPOC residents are service workers and blue collar workers. They have to rely on cars to get to work overnight and night shifts and some of them are self employed as Uber and Lyft drivers. Due to the lack of affordable grocery stores in Cambridge, grocery shopping needs to be outside of Cambridge at places such as Market Basket in Somerville and other affordable grocery stores in Boston. Working families with young children unfortunately need to rely on their cars to purchase food for their household and transporting their young children to day care (if they can afford it), or to another family member to care for the children while they work.

Burhan Azeem

Cambridge is an old city and we have a lot of history. There is value in preserving that. At the same time, as Einstein et al. show, some neighborhood processes are often dominated by a highly unrepresentative group of local landowners. Policies, such as the current low threshold needed to establish an NCD, make it more difficult to get the true feeling of the community which should be needed for such large changes.

Dana Bullister

It makes sense for the process to incorporate a reasonably substantive degree of community input before imposing additional restrictions on homeowners. Historic Conservation Districts certainly have a place and should be taken seriously. Their process should acknowledge the nontrivial nature of many of their restrictions and include a more deliberate, community-inclusive process before active enforcement.

Robert Eckstut

Unsure how it should be specifically be reformed.

Alanna Mallon

The current rules by which a Neighborhood Conservation District study is initiated needs immediate reform. The original municipal code outlines a process in which just ten residents can organize to petition for the Cambridge Historical Commission to study a neighborhood to determine if there should be a Neighborhood Conservation District. These ten residents can impact hundreds of homes within a district for up to a year during the study period, and in the case of the East Cambridge NCD study, studies can be arbitrarily extended for even longer. During the subsequent study period, the entire district is treated as though it’s already part of an NCD, making changes and proposed projects difficult. In a City struggling with skyrocketing prices, combined with an out of control housing market, raising property values should not be a goal of any neighborhood group or preservation effort. I am 100% behind historic designation and protection for buildings deemed historically significant by the Historical Commission, but an NCD seems to increasingly be used as a protectionist tool for entire swaths of neighborhoods led by a very small number of residents. Reforming the current process to be more inclusive, as well as ensuring equity and rising housing costs are centered in the conversation, is imperative

Marc McGovern

The issue with the most recent NCD petitions is that they were filed not so much to preserve historical buildings, but to stop new development. I support protecting history buildings, but we also must make new development possible.

Gregg J. Moree

NCD needs reform and housing prices should not be increased.

Roy Ribitzky

Cambridge is hundreds of years old – there is history here and that should be preserved. However, we must ensure that organizations aren’t using outdated policies and zoning laws to discriminate against residents that live and/or want to live here.

E. Denise Simmons

I generally do think this is something that should be considered. If we’re finding that Neighborhood Conservation Districts are being used to increase housing prices, or to discourage certain types of people from living in certain neighborhoods, then we do need to explore whether reform is appropriate.

Theodora Skeadas

I would push to examine the existing rules and proceed with reforms that better advance equity by advocating for reforms in the management of these organizations to ensure that advisory boards feature a diverse range of people and perspectives.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Too often, neighborhood and historical preservation—not just in Cambridge but nationally—has unfortunately been used as a tool by appointed bodies that are less representative than the community as a whole in terms of racial and economic diversity to block housing, including in areas near public transit like we’ve seen recently in Harvard Square. While there is important work for historical bodies educating and passing on the unique legacy of Cambridge, that goal can be achieved without preserving in amber areas of the city that are currently among the most expensive and exclusive. For hundreds of years, Cambridge has evolved and changed to meet the needs of residents. A pressing need now is for housing that people can actually afford, and we need to ensure that enabling legislation for preservation doesn’t block that goal.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate believes NCD's are not in alphabetical order, and should be CDN's!

Paul F. Toner

I'm open to reviewing and reforming NCD rules, especially about assuring diversity of membership and perspective. I would, however, seek to sit down with various community stakeholders to better understand which rules should be changed and which should remain in place, as well as ensure that the new rules do not result in unintended consequences and will work to protect the original objectives of balancing the character of the neighborhood with the need for revitalization and new development.

Nicola Williams

I do not agree that Cambridge Historical Commission, Conservation Districts and Neighborhood Organizations are obstacles to affordable housing. I do believe there is some historical context that have excluded certain races and classes, and today, we need to continuously work on improving that. As a Vice President of my neighborhood association, I believe that our associations need to be more diverse, both racially and socio-economically. We also have two neighborhood associations: Area 4/Port and Riverside that serve significant Black and Hispanic residents but are not fully operational.

Burhan Azeem

Yes. It is vital that tenants have excellent legal representation. Far too many evictions occur over small sums of money or other issues that could be resolved; providing legal counsel is a first step toward addressing that.

Dana Bullister

As mentioned above, 90 percent of landlords typically have legal representation, while only 10 percent of tenants do. Tenants should have ready access to such resources, a full understanding of their rights, and fair hearings. The city might also consider providing mediation services.

Robert Eckstut

I highlighted this earlier in a different question; biggest stress on tenants is not understanding their rights / not having the resources to fight properly. I heavily support this.

Alanna Mallon

Tenants that show up to housing court without an attorney are extremely likely to lose their case, furthering the justice gap. However, when tenants have a right to counsel or are provided free legal aid attorneys, the playing field is level, and fully-represented tenants win or settle their cases 96% of the time. Additionally, a study out of Baltimore showed that for every dollar that the City spent on providing tenants with attorneys, it saved the City $3.06 in social and safety-net services that come with the disruption of eviction and displacement. The best way to ensure someone has access to a roof over their heads is to ensure they don’t lose the home they have. No one should go into housing court alone, and I am committed to continuing this program that helps some of our most vulnerable residents.

Marc McGovern

I supported this policy order that increased legal funding for tenants. I also added an amendment to the order that now requires landlords to provide their tenants (at lease signing) of their rights and resources, so that tenants are better educated prior to any eviction or issue arises.

Gregg J. Moree

Everyone should have the opportunity to state their case. This is America and everyone should have the right to a fair trial.

Roy Ribitzky

Besides labor laws, anecdotally I can tell you tenants rights are constantly being violated. I know a Cambridge renter that was given 30 days to move out of the apartment so the landlord could renovate the place. 30 days? To find a new apartment? In the middle of summer? During a pandemic? That’s not fair. There must be clear and strong City programs that everyone knows about – especially landlords – that tenants can access whenever needed.

E. Denise Simmons

I give this my unqualified support, and if I am on the Council in the next term, I will certainly be pushing for increased funding for this, just as I did this year. This year, we were able to justify the increase due to the impact of the pandemic, but it’s clear that this is a policy that can save so many people from displacement that otherwise might not have the money or wherewithal to obtain adequate legal counsel.

Theodora Skeadas

Yes, it is important to protect tenants. The majority of Cambridge residents, including myself, are renters. For too long power in Cambridge has been skewed in favor of wealthy developers and private interests. This has contributed to rising rental costs and a lack of protections for tenants. We need immediate action to lower the rent and prevent mass evictions while planning for long-term housing stability. As a City Councillor, I will push to Establish a Tenant Bill of Rights including a tenant’s right to counsel.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Cambridge has both the resources and expertise to fund a full right to counsel for tenants in Cambridge. The corporations pursuing evictions almost always have legal representation and ensuring that tenants have an equal right to a lawyer is the least that the City can do. Along with tenant organizing, legal representation is one of the strongest tools available to renters to resist displacement and assert their human right to housing in neighborhoods that they have helped maintain and make vibrant, even if they don’t own the physical property in which they have made their homes. Residents could be notified of their right to lawyer as part of the housing rights notification ordinance that the City Council passed this term. And the right to counsel program could be managed by a newly created Office of Housing Stability.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate will personally counsel every tenant facing eviction!

Paul F. Toner

No explanation necessary - I support guaranteed legal representation.

Nicola Williams

Cambridge needs to support tenant protections like the Right of First Refusal and the Right to Counsel which drastically decreases peoples’ odds of eviction.

Burhan Azeem

It’s clear that the Council values sustainability, but it could also be both more ambitious and more thoughtful in its approach. I support increasing the tree canopy, net-zero zoning, and other bills. However, I disagree with thinking about emissions just *within* the city; it’s vital to understand how our land-use policy affects travel patterns and emissions outside of Cambridge.

Dana Bullister

I think the city has made impressive strides in addressing climate change and preparedness via programs like Resilient Cambridge, which advocates for closer communities, sustainable building, stronger infrastructure, and a greener city. However, I think we have also fallen short in advocating for a better balance of housing versus additional commercial development. The new Volpe site, for example, should have been negotiated to enable a greater percentage of housing relative to commercial use. Yet more commercial units in our already job rich city means more demand on strained housing resources. Such building also forces more employees to commute from outside the city, which exacerbates congestion and resulting environmental consequences. Our city needs to do a better job of advocating for more housing relative to commercial development.

Robert Eckstut

As a challenger, I'd rather not heavily praise the current city council - since if I believed they were doing a great job, it would be fairly egotistical of me to even run. However, I don't think they've done a good job, so I can't name anything that is encouraging.

Alanna Mallon

Over the last decade, the City has embarked on a series of aggressive approaches to sustainable building standards which are codified through article 22.20 of the zoning ordinance, the City’s Green Building Requirements. The City Council is constantly updating article 22.20 to respond and adapt these Green Building Requirements to an ever changing landscape and climate crisis. These requirements promote “environmentally sustainable and energy-efficient design and development practices. The requirements apply to developments of 25,000 square feet or more, including new construction and some types of substantial renovation.” The best examples of these practices are in recent developments or renovations of our affordable housing stock. As these housing non-profit organizations will keep these buildings in their portfolios for decades to come, they are heavily incentivized to implement the most energy efficient systems and buildings possible to reduce costs. For an example of this, we can look at the renovation of the Manning Apartments in Central Square, 50 York Street by Just a Start and Finch Apartments by Homeowners Rehab, Inc. which was built to a passive house standard. Our affordable housing developers are leading the way in green building, and we should continue to amend article 22.20 for market rate and commercial builders to follow their lead and example. Where we have missed the mark is the recent “Green Roofs Petition'' which requires that 80% of the usable roof space be a vegetative roof covering, and solar panels can only be built above the green roof. I argued during the zoning process that though I believe that green roofs and increasing urban gardens and vegetation are an effective tool to combat climate change, without a solar only option builders wouldn’t have enough flexibility to use the best onsite renewable energy option we have in our urban environment, PV panels. Other municipalities who have implemented green roof zoning, like Denver, CO have had to revise their policies to allow for a solar only option. Since its passage, we have already seen one large project from MIT apply for a special permit to opt out of this requirement because complying would not allow them to meet their own internal aggressive climate goals. When we target and pass zoning to address the looming climate crisis, we need to ensure we are maximizing the impact through the zoning we pass, rather than limiting effects for political gain.

Marc McGovern

Everything we do, in our private lives, our professional lives and our personal lives, is about priorities. When everything works out and housing can be built without cutting down a tree, reducing parking or causing traffic, we can all celebrate. Unfortunately, that is not always possible and difficult decisions must be made. In the end, we need to do whatever we can to reduce negative impacts of development, but not at the expense of homes. The issue of trees/tree preservation - Yes, trees are important particularly in urban areas and we must do whatever we can to encourage developers to save trees when possible but we cannot continue to create the false conflict between trees and homes. The reality is that the failure to build sustainable, transit-oriented development in Cambridge just pushes the development of new housing into further flung suburban areas where trees, open space, and even farmland are destroyed to meet the regional/state demand for new housing. As stated previously, building more densely, particularly close to transit, and building out our bike infrastructure are other ways to reduce the need for car ownership. Eliminating parking minimums and moving forward with the Bike Safety Ordinance are issues I support and will help with sustainability.

Gregg J. Moree

I like that they are trying to get more housing. I dislike that not enough Cambridge residents are hired to do development and there are no Youth Apprenticeship }programs.

Roy Ribitzky

From what I have seen and read the City Council has often meant well and did many studies that show dire situation our City and planet is in, but it seems like progress is slow. There are many stakeholders when it comes to urban planning and sustainability, and even people that agree on more efficient buildings might disagree on how to accomplish the same goal. I agree overall with the mission the Council has adopted to address Climate Change, but it just seems to move too slow. With the U.N.’s latest climate report, we must act fast.

E. Denise Simmons

I believe the City Council has done a solid job of encouraging sustainability in recent years. I agree with the efforts we have made to ensure that new City buildings over the past decade have been made in an energy-efficient fashion, adhering to the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria. I think this is the right way of trying to reduce our carbon footprint and to walk the walk; the area that I am less thrilled about is more what I view as the blind spot that the City appears to have in regards to putting the concept of open space above the immediate needs of creating more desperately needed affordable units (for example, there are some who have been advocating that the Cherry Street lot that we acquired from MIT several years ago should be turned into green space for area residents. I vehemently disagree with that idea, as we acquired this with the specific intent of using it for some sort of affordable housing, which is in far too short a supply).

Theodora Skeadas

I absolutely support getting Cambridge to net zero carbon emissions. However, I believe the City could be doing a better job in pursuing systemic change to divulge from fossil fuels instead of more incremental measures.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

I was the lead sponsor on Cambridge’s 2020 Cycling Safety Ordinance updates that passed with strong support on the Council and will create more than 20 miles of protected bike lanes in the next few years. These improvements to our streets will save lives and help reduce both traffic and emissions. I disagree with the lack of comprehensive updates to the city’s zoning to prioritize housing, end parking minimums, and create a more sustainable built environment. In part because it is widely understood that the city’s current zoning is out of date, the Council has spent countless hours in the Ordinance Committee discussing petitions for very specific changes, mostly in Alewife and Kendall Square. There are currently little to no requirements for housing in these areas, and the Council has too often been left to haggle over specific office- and lab-centered proposals and community benefits instead of laying out a comprehensive vision for a more affordable, walkable, sustainable, transit-oriented, and community-centered city through our zoning and planning processes.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate agrees with ability, but disagrees with stain.

Paul F. Toner

This is an area that I will need to learn more about and research but I believe Cambridge has been a leader on the issue of sustainability. The city has advanced policies and programs to address the threat and impact of climate change by developing a resiliency plan focused on Closer Neighborhoods, Better Buildings, Stronger Infrastructure, and a Greener City. ABC’s priorities of developing denser, transit situated housing are at the center of these plans, along with bicycle infrastructure and alternative transportation to reduce our city’s carbon emissions. Any policies we put forward need to be consistent, clear, and predictable. When people are planning, they need to understand what is expected of them and start from the beginning knowing the cost impacts and can plan accordingly.

Nicola Williams

I agree with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by replacing gas stoves with electric stoves, and I also supported the green roofs ordinance that was passed this year. I disagree with the fact that public housing developments are pretty much exempt from environmental standards. Low income neighbors need the same access to trees as the privileged and environmental justice is serious. The highest rates of asthma are prevalent in low income communities and communities of color.

Burhan Azeem

Walking, biking, or using transit in Cambridge should be just as safe, easy, and convenient as using a car or any other means of transportation. This means ensuring that sidewalks are kept in excellent shape and clear of snow and ice; building protected bike lanes throughout the city; and implementing bus lanes, queue jumps, and transit signal priority along key bus routes. It also means ensuring adequate staffing in City departments and a clear framework to make sure these improvements are implemented; the Cambridge Bike plan is a good model here, but it should be expanded to include more areas and bus infrastructure as well.

Dana Bullister

The city should invest in implementing a connected citywide network of protected bike lanes as outlined by the Cycling Safety Ordinance. The city can also invest in both sidewalk and road infrastructure to encourage safety and explore providing additional busing in areas not well served by transit. The city can also explore reducing barriers to using such public transit (for example, providing discounts and vouchers).

Robert Eckstut

I took the Cambridge Biking Safety pledge; I also believe in free pubilc transit. Many people of whom I've spoken have complained about sidewalks, specifically handicapped people who have trouble with the state of our walkways. Given I believe in as few cars as possible, I think an increase of bike lanes, free transit, and improved sidewalks is the best way to achieve this goal.

Alanna Mallon

I was proud to co-sponsor the amendment to the Cycling Safety Ordinance to create 26+ miles of a protected bike lane network in Cambridge. If we want to effectively mode shift from fossil fuel dependence, decrease the amount of cars on our streets and increase cycling in Cambridge, building out this network is critical. Not only is it important that we finish building out our protected bike lanes in Cambridge, but we must also ask who this new protected network is being created for. I’ve been working with the Cambridge Bike Giveback program to ensure that low-income residents have access to bicycles and ways to repair them, so that everyone in Cambridge has access to this low cost transportation method. I have also advocated for a fare-free MBTA bus route in Cambridge to promote transit equity as well as improving bus service in the City to encourage increased ridership. We must ensure we are creating accessible transportation options to increase usage and mode shift away from cars to meet our climate goals and ensure our streets are safe for everyone.

Marc McGovern

1. Continue to build out our bike safety infrastructure to fully realize our Vision Zero goals. 2. Eliminate parking minimums. 3. Implement parking maximums for large projects. 4. Work with the MBTA to make buses free. 5. Build more densely near public transit. 6. Continue to implement bus priority lanes to make public transit faster and more reliable. 7. Require market-rate developers to provide bike parking, and Charlie Cards (for a minimum of a year) to tenants. 8. Improve the quality of our sidewalks. 9. In the past we have talked about a free, "Cambridge Shuttle" service that can act as an internal public transportation system. We should explore this further.

Gregg J. Moree

Better bike and walk paths.

Roy Ribitzky

We should have more weekends where squares and other business-filled streets are pedestrian only (such as what Newbury Street in Boston does over the summer). We should study and plan our roads to have as many bike-only lanes as possible to protect bikers, drivers, and pedestrians. We should also work with the MBTA to figure out where we need more or less bus stops to ensure every resident lives within walking distance of public transportation.

E. Denise Simmons

Beyond encouraging the building of transit-oriented developments, I think we need to find new and creative ways to encourage residents. Whether it’s through offering financial incentives, or offering perks like free or reduced-fare memberships to bike-shares or movie tickets or coupons for groceries, we need to explore ways to make these modes of transportation seem too good to ignore.

Theodora Skeadas

As a Councillor, you can count on me to fight for greater equity in our public transit system including fare free paratransit as well as efforts to make current public transportation systems more accessible to disabled community members. I plan to work with the City of Cambridge to implement separated bike lanes in order to create a safe, city-wide protected network that serves residents of all ages and abilities. This includes permanent protected bike lanes when streets are reconstructed and lanes using temporary materials outside of the reconstruction plan. As for walking, I pledge to take a proactive approach to pedestrian safety and listen to residents’ concerns so safety improvement measures are implemented before tragedy strikes. I will work to expand sidewalks and maintain crosswalks, implement traffic calming measures and ensure that all streets have pedestrian friendly traffic signal timing so that all people can feel safe traveling the streets of Cambridge. I believe that usage will increase through expanded access to and safety of walking, biking, and transit.

Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler

Cambridge should fund fare-free buses and bus-priority lanes to help speed up bus travel, ensure it is consistently on time, and reduce the cost. Improving bus service and reducing fares is a way to improve racial and economic equity and reduce emissions. Studies have demonstrated that bus riders are disproportionately likely to be low-income and people of color compared to the general population. Because bus fares are collected as passengers board, fare-free buses help speed up bus service in addition to improving equity and boosting ridership. Boston’s fare-free bus pilot for the #28, as well Lawrence’s fare-free service, provide examples that Cambridge can adapt here. Bus lanes also help boost ridership by reducing commute times, especially on streets like Mt Auburn Street, where studies have shown that more than 50% of commuters traveled by bus but more than 90% of the traffic is cars. Bus-priority lanes would make a huge difference for routes like the #1 bus, which has both among the highest ridership and highest delays in the whole MBTA system. Cambridge’s updated Cycling Safety Ordinance, which I introduced, will make it easier and safer to bike in Cambridge, which more than 80% of surveyed residents, and a majority in every age category, say they want. It has already served as a model for other cities, including Washington, DC. Cambridge should expand its sidewalk snow removal as one way to make it easier to walk in the city, especially for residents with disabilities or who are pushing strollers. While the City currently clears areas around parks and schools, it leaves most other sidewalks to private property owners, creating a sometimes patchwork and uneven system for snow removal. I chaired a Transportation Committee meeting about this in January of this year. Cambridge could follow the lead of cities such as Rochester and Burlington in clearing key sidewalk routes, like those between the Squares on Mass Ave, Hampshire and Prospect.

Test Candidate

Test Candidate will spend the entire City Council term riding the Red Line back and forth!

Paul F. Toner

I do not have much more to add to the discussion other than creating more affordable and market rate housing along and near transit hubs. Also, building out planned bike infrastructure, priority bus lanes and provide for other modes of alternative transportation. In some cases, it would be as simple as repaving the streets to eliminate potholes and other hazards to cyclists. Finally, as to walking, it would be nice if all of our sidewalks were reviewed and repaved where necessary. Many of our sidewalks are impassible due to uneven surfaces and tree roots popping up through the surface and are not handicap accessible.

Nicola Williams

We need more protected bike lanes while further developing our transit infrastructure to ensure accessibility and safety to those who need these services. The Red line has been chronically underfunded and riders are frustrated with the lack of innovative solutions. As I reiterated previously, we need to work with municipal leaders in neighboring cities to create a regional approach around transportation. I also believe in working with local businesses and the local community in helping to achieve space for walking, biking, and transit infrastructure that many people support. Developing partnerships between transit-oriented development and its users would benefit both the MTBA and nearby riders. Additionally, I support a local pilot to offer free public transportation in Cambridge including free bus transit vouchers for those in need. I am also committed to creating policies that encourage people to use sustainable modes of transit when possible. In order to encourage communal travel, the city of Cambridge must invest in infrastructure and services that will make this goal feasible. Raising revenue for investment in clean transportation solutions is an integral strategy to addressing this and bringing our transportation system into the 21st century.