It’s not quite fair to call it the $11.4 million curb cut, but the lengths to which lot owner Eric Griffith will go to get it for the use of occasionally visiting in-laws makes it begin to seem like the value of his property (assessed at that amount) hinges on it. This is the second time he’s asked for a delay from the council.

Griffith’s latest step, along with claimed attempts to keep meeting with neighbors and win them over:

“We’ve been asked to request that this matter be deferred for one week so that we can put in writing our intention to use this driveway for passenger vehicles and that we will direct any service or landscaping vehicles to use the driveway on Raymond Street,” owner Eric Griffith said.  The lot is 53,667 square feet, straddling the block from Raymond to where the curb cut is proposed for a cul-de-sac called Wyman Street.

Griffith hoped Avon Hill residents opposed to his curb cut request would change their mind, but construction of his gigantic single-family home and the auxiliary unit has been going on for four years. Neighbors’ nerves are frayed and their suspicions aroused. Forty have signed a letter to the council against the curb cut, and several have railed against it at council meetings.

Griffith has said his 13 nearest neighbors didn’t oppose the curb cut — ostensibly the same 13 identified by the city’s Inspectional Services Department as the ones needed to sign off on the project for its own departmental approval. If the application is approved by Inspectional Services, it is sent on to Traffic and Parking, then the Historical Commission and the Department of Public Works. If approved by Public Works, the application goes to the City Council for its approval. The council has it now.

“There have been some irregularities to this process,” Avon Hill resident Margot Welch told the council Monday.

Griffith’s application included only four names, not 13, Welch said. A look at the file in confirms her testimony.

The four signers included Griffith himself and two opponents of the curb cut — Lowry Pei, of Bellevue Avenue, who confirmed Wednesday that he signed in support July 5, but changed his mind after Welch spoke with him; and Judith Parker, who lives on Wyman Street directly across from where the curb cut would go. She filed a letter Aug. 18 saying she was against the driveway but, giving the sense she was resigned to it, hoped Griffith would discourage frequent use of it.

“I would strongly recommend that you place a ‘Private Driveway’ sign at the entrance to discourage others from using it,” she wrote Aug. 18.

She seemed resigned to it, as her letter says, “since the commission has accepted your curb cut.”

Parker didn’t respond to a message left Wednesday asking what she meant by “the commission.” The woman answering the phone at Parker’s home thought it referred to one of Avon Hill’s historical groups, which would have to be the case: City rules say those signed forms from neighbors must be included in an application “to receive a review from Inspectional Services” and start the approval process, and the last of the four signatures in the file belongs to Griffith, dated Sept. 5.

Inspectional Services signed off on Griffith’s plan Sept. 22; the Historical Commission on Sept. 28; Traffic and Parking on Oct. 5; and Public Works on Oct. 19, according to the file.

Griffith has an unlisted phone number and could not be reached for comment. In November he declined to speak on the issue beyond remarks made during public meetings, saying he preferred to speak with the opposing Avon Hill residents privately.

That meant the night’s votes ended with an unchanged three votes for second-term councillor Leland Cheung, Decker dropping to two votes (her own and that of David Maher), two for Reeves and one each for Henrietta Davis and Tim Toomey — their own.

It seemed at first a decision was imminent, because Cheung made a motion even before the meeting’s public comment period to hold a mayoral vote to the start of the meeting. Mayoral votes are typically held at the end. But the reason was councillor Denise Simmons’ illness, Cheung explained after the meeting. Simmons was able to leave after the vote and recover at home.

Decker noted Toomey’s absence and asked that the vote wait for him to appear, prompting Cheung to apologize, retract his motion and explain that he thought Toomey was in the council’s private rooms, about to enter.

Henrietta Davis agreed the vote should wait for Toomey — but not too long, another hint that a final vote was in the offing.

But when he arrived at 5:49 p.m., and the vote was taken after the next speaker finished her public comment, there was no candidate with the five votes needed for consensus. After a fourth ballot sticking to the numbers of the previous two meetings, Reeves got his two votes on the fifth ballot and kept them for the sixth.

Toomey had tried to end the votes with the fifth ballot, but City Clerk Margaret Drury said Cheung had spoken first. The sixth was taken, resulting in no change. The delay is by no means a record — more than 1,300 ballots were taken in 1948 — but keeps committee chairs from being assigned and delays a permanent leader for the School Committee.

For the second and third ballots, councillors were deadlocked at three votes for Cheung (from himself, Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom) and three for Decker (from herself, Maher and Reeves); and one each for Davis, Kelley and Toomey, with each of those members voting for themselves to be mayor. The balloting began Jan. 2 with two each for Cheung (with vanBeuzekom), Decker and Maher, and one each for Henrietta Davis, Craig Kelley and Simmons.

Kelley told the council he wouldn’t be at Monday’s meeting for a vote, and Decker asked again to hear the rules for calling a special meeting for the purposes of voting.

“I think there is a sense of urgency, if committee are to be assigned,” Decker said. “I know the School Committee also has a lot on its plate.”

Wyman Street, where a curb cut to a driveway has been proposed, is not quite opposite a nursery school on Hillside Place. (Image: Google Maps)

Considering the rhetoric like they get to hear on a proposed driveway up on ritzy Avon Hill — about the meaning of democracy, the future of a historic neighborhood and thinking of the children — it’s little surprise city councillors are thinking of delegating responsibility for them.

But councillors will still have to decide whether to grant a second one to the owner of a gigantic home and in-law unit going up at 79 Raymond St., a lot so large in straddles the block to 9 Wyman St., which has drawn more than the usual level of anti-curb cut bombast over the course of several council meetings. Indeed, it was Avon Hill resident Margot Welch who told councillors Monday that the curb cut plans were not just about “the long-term retention of the character of the neighborhood,” but compelled the question, “Now and in the future, what do you want democracy to be, and not just look like?”

There have been some dodgy assertions made before about the curb cut request, which would add a fourth driveway to a short, dead-end street that some say is like “a little pocket park … where children play,” and Monday brought some fresh concerns from Avon Hill residents that deserve a bit of fact checking:

“The benefit of the curb cut to [owner Eric Griffith] is far and away [greater] than to Mrs. Judith Parker and other neighbors, including the children attending the Cambridge Nursery School and their parents. Cambridge Nursery School is right opposite — the entrance is pretty much opposite to Wyman Street,” said John Cobb, of Avon Hill Street.

As is clear from an overhead view from Google Maps or a similar service, Wyman Street is not “right opposite” the 6 Hillside Place nursery school but might be considered “pretty much opposite.” They are on opposite sides of Avon Hill Street, separated by the width of a house with a generous amount of yard. Not that it much matters. As neighbors and a former president of the school describe it, 26 families drop off and pick up their kids from the school every day and use Wyman Street as parking. In all the testimony before the council no one has explained why those couple of dozen cars are not a threat to “the children and their parents,” but any car using a fourth Wyman Street curb cut is.

“What might be afoot? A commonly expressed concern is that this 24,932-square-foot structure, to be called home by a couple and a child, may not always be so. Sooner or later, neighbors fear, it will be called corporate headquarters or retreat center or academy or something like that. So what? Unlike single-family homes, corporate headquarters have a lot of … services that demand many heavy vehicles for maintenance, landscaping and catering to users’ creature comforts,” said Joan Friebely, another Avon Hill Street resident.

In November, Friebely said the council should think of the proposed driveway as serving nine single-family homes because the 53,665-square-foot lot could have squeezed nine in if Griffith hadn’t decided to instead build one big house and an in-law unit. (Similarly, she worries about landscaping trucks serving a 53,665-square-foot lot that she fears would change use, but it’s not clear why more landscaping trucks would be needed for what would still be a 53,665-square-foot lot.) Now her argument is that the curb cut should be rejected because at some indeterminate point in the future it could serve more than a couple and their child.

Either way, the lot she worries about is in A-2 zoning, which allows only single-family, detached homes. The lot borders some B zoning, which allows single- and two-family detached homes and, by the granting of a special permit, townhouses. (Both zoning types could also allow, according to the city’s table of use regulations, conversion for “elderly oriented congregate housing.” So the risk is that Griffith is building his home and in-law unit so he can convert them to senior housing.)

If Friebely and others would rather fight a curb cut now than a radical change in zoning in the future, it may say more about their perception of the City Council’s priorities than Griffith’s. Either way, their arguments include some clunkers.

The passionate, outspoken opponents of the curb cut do not include the 13 neighbors living closest to the lot, Griffith told the council, and Jan. 9 heard some of the first testimony from a supporter: Bliss Austin Spooner,  yet another Avon Hill Street resident, who said her home is about 100 yards from the curb cut proposals “riling up my neighborhood.”

“I grew up on that street, so I kind of remember the days they talk about of children playing in those areas. Those days are gone,” Austin Spooner said. “In fact, my children are the only children practically on the whole street. They certainly live the closest to the [proposed] Wyman Street curb cut, and I’m not worried about my kids and I don’t think kids should be the reason it’s approved or not. I’m in complete support of the Wyman curb cut.”

“I know you’ve heard a lot about these curb cuts,” she said. “Honestly? They’re not a big deal.”

A crowd packs School Committee chambers Tuesday to give testimony on the end of the district’s Intensive Study Program. (Photo: Marc Levy)

The fight to save the school district’s Intensive Studies Program has itself intensified, with a majority of the 30 students, parents and city councillors speaking Tuesday at a School Committee meeting urging officials and administrators to at least let current ISP kids finish their promised years.

The program accepts nearly any student who feels held back educationally in their traditional classrooms, although the program is for sixth-, seventh- and eighth-graders only and is held only at the Kennedy-Longfellow and Peabody schools. With the Innovation Agenda separating the middle-school grades from the district’s elementary schools and moving them to new “upper schools” in September, the 175 or so students in the program are dreading its announced end — and a return to classes where they say they’ve been bullied, pressed into teaching other kids or bored to the point of surreptitiously reading books and doing homework under their desks.

“I was in a reading group for one year reading this thin, little book that was below my reading level, and it took us the entire year to read it because our teacher would completely forget to meet with us. She’d be too busy with other groups,” said one student, Celeste DeLancey.

“One math class we actually spent the whole class on one question, waiting for the kids who were struggling,” said another student, Zeke Iammarino. “Now that I’m in the ISP I learn much quicker, and as opposed to one question that we did throughout the one day, we did a whole packet in a class.”

Academic Challenge

School officials say they hope to find a way to bring the advantages of ISP to all students, but in classrooms that hold all level of learners. The Academic Challenge report presented to the committee Jan. 17 includes an honors class option for math in the upper schools, but no specific advanced option for English-language arts or social studies, just a “Scholars Challenge” component that the report says will — when designed by middle-grades teachers and heads of upper schools — provide “a structured opportunity for each student to challenge him/herself to develop academically, socially and emotionally [and] serve to support the creation of a community of learners.”

The four choices for upper-school deans are to be offered the jobs next month, but not formally start work until the summer, district officials have said. The committee has a Feb. 7 vote scheduled to accept or reject the Academic Challenge report that could erase ISP from the district, but District Deputy Superintendent Carolyn Turk said that date was set at the beginning of the school year and could be changed as the committee deemed necessary.

That vote would likely come with more discussion of whether there can be two teachers in upper school classrooms to give more attention to a range of student abilities, an alternative proposed by committee member Marc McGovern. (After hearing comment about ISP, school officials went into the first of two budget retreats that will also weigh on the possibility. The next is Tuesday.)

“The social and academic contract”

But among the packed committee room, lined with students holding signs and frequently pounding cabinets as a form of applause during the meeting’s nearly two hours, more than a dozen people exhorted Superintendent Jeffrey Young and the committee to let the ISP students finish out their time either way.

“At least modify [the Academic Challenge report] to allow students currently enrolled in the ISP to finish the program they were promised through the eighth grade. If you do this, you’ll have fulfilled your part in the social and academic contract you made with these children and you’ll have garnered two years of data with which to assess whether the new system really does incorporate the best parts of the ISP,” parent Shannon Larkin said. “That being said, I have grave concerns about the Academic Challenge recommendation and urge you to send the document back for revision. It contains too many wishes and not enough substance or support to make those wishes come true.”

Larkin wasn’t alone in that sentiment. Among those with similar concerns about the plan were councillor Craig Kelley — also in attendance were councillors Leland Cheung and Denise Simmons, while Ken Reeves led the meeting — who noted the “huge amount” of professional development needed before September to get teachers up to speed on the so-called differentiated instruction.

A few people simply said the district wouldn’t be able to pull off a change by September.

“If everybody goes back to what the Innovation Agenda is about, it’s about being operationally ready in September 2012. It’s almost February. I still don’t know what the foreign language options will be … math seems like it’s progressing relatively well, but what about English, what about social studies? If we’re planning on implementing the Innovation Agenda, we’re not ready in September. We need a Plan B,” Daniel Schutzberg said. “I’m beginning to consider what my options are in public schools, and I don’t like my choices.”

There were also those for whom even grandfathering current ISP kids wasn’t enough. “It doesn’t have to be ISP, but there has to be something for these kids. And it can’t just be the grandfathered-in kids for the next couple of years, because there are other kids behind them with the same issues,” said one of those, Lisa McManus.

Much of the most powerful testimony of the night belonged to the several students who spoke, and perhaps it is apt that it was a student who got the biggest, most appreciative laugh of the night as well.

“Please just let the kids that are already in ISP [complete] the term,” Zeke Iammarino said. “Because it’s kind of like someone’s eating a cheeseburger and you knock it out of their hand.”

This post was updated Jan. 26, 2012, to correct the number of students in ISP classes.

Bicycles in the Hubway rental program wait for riders outside South Station in Boston. Hubway is to arrive in Cambridge in the spring, with helmet-dispensing machines and a safety brochure. (Photo: John Dalton)

When 20 bike rental stations arrive in the spring, the City Council expects them to be accompanied by HelmetHub machines — helmet dispensers designed by a dozen Massachusetts Institute of Technology students — and a reminder of the rules of the road.

The councillors said so Monday in an 8-1 vote that may well have been unanimous but for Craig Kelley’s continued dismay over a possibly outsized priority being put on bicycle safety and rules enforcement. Recent council candidates James Williamson said during the night’s public comment period that the helmet dispensers should dispense a brochure with the bicycling rules of Cambridge. Councillor Minka vanBeuzekom offered a version of his idea (that the city “prepare a brochure on the rules of the road for dispensing with the helmets”) as an amendment to Henrietta Davis’ order seeking installation of the machines.

“I continue to be just amazed at how focused we are that someone renting a bicycle needs to study [the rules],” Kelley said. “I rented a car from Enterprise in Central Square the other day and they just looked at my license and sent me on my merry way … we’re not making anyone who rents a car acknowledge that they know it’s dangerous to text and drive. I get hit by cars probably once every two months, and I’m really getting tired of everyone looking at the rental program as a menace.”

The program, called Hubway (with naming rights going to New Balance, the Boston maker of athletic gear), debuted in Boston in July with 60 stations and 600 bikes. It was expected to make it to Cambridge in the fall, but the rollout there and in Somerville, which is expected to get eight rental stations, was delayed to spring. The system offers memberships for $85 a year, $12 for three days and $5 for a day; members get unlimited half-hour rides, with higher fees for longer trips.

The solar-powered dispensers have been described as costing $8 per helmet, with a partial refund if a helmet is returned.

Bicycle renters have to sign a form saying they understand the rules of the road. The council’s vote means those rules should be also available in brochure form, even if they’re not dispensed with helmets, so riders can brush up before pedaling away.

Tops in reported crashes

Bicycle safety and legal riding have been topics for months, thanks in part to Williamson’s campaigning and the city’s preparations for the coming of Hubway. Early in January VanBeuzekom noted Cambridge’s rankings among the state’s top 200 crash locations in an August report by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The report is limited — it tracks only reported, geocoded crashes between 2002-09 — but puts Cambridge in the top 10 multiple times for pedestrian and bicycle incidents.

The dramatic number of bicycle crashes is likely a natural result of what’s been called a 150 percent surge in bicycle use since 2002, to the extent that Cambridge was named the seventh-best bike city in the country by the League of American Bicyclists last year. By league figures, bicycle commuters make up 8.5 percent of the overall population.

Cambridge contributes two of the state’s top 10 pedestrian crash clusters (No. 3, with 94 crashes, is Massachusetts Avenue in Central Square; No. 6 is Elm Street from Davis Square nearly to Porter Square, and as such shares its 38 crashes with Somerville) and essentially is the list of top 10 bicycle crash clusters: It takes every slot but Nos. 7 and 8.

The No. 1 spot, shared with Somerville, is where Kirkland and Cambridge streets meet Beacon and Hampshire streets; the No. 2 spot is on Massachusetts Avenue in Central Square; the No. 3 spot is again with Somerville, at Massachusetts Avenue around Porter Square; the No. 4 spot is down Massachusetts Avenue toward MIT; the No. 5 spot is southeast of Harvard Square starting from where Massachusetts Avenue meets Mount Auburn Street; No. 6 extends from Norris Street along Massachusetts Avenue and across Route 16 into Arlington; No. 9 is on Massachusetts Avenue where it meets Memorial Drive; and No. 10 is on Broadway above Central Square. The number of crashes ranges from 106 crashes reported at the top spot to 22 at the No. 10 spot.

That means Monday saw three votes for Leland Cheung (from himself, Denise Simmons and Minka vanBeuzekom); three for Marjorie Decker (from herself, David Maher and Ken Reeves); and one each for Henrietta Davis, Craig Kelley and Tim Toomey, with each of those members voting for themselves to be mayor.

Five votes are needed from within the council for the election of a mayor. Two years ago, a deadlocked vote delayed the election of a mayor nearly into a third month of balloting — still far from the record 1,396 ballots set in 1948.

The issue of the need for a mayor arose a couple of times throughout the meeting, starting with Reeves noting that every citizen who spoke longer than the allotted three minutes during public comment had been granted an extension, which “creates the expectation the rules will always be suspended” and hinted at having the council’s Government Operations and Rules Committee look anew at the rules of the comment period. (As the longest-serving councillor, Reeves leads meetings for the council and School Committee until a mayor is elected.)

“Along those lines, our rules say we should start our meetings at 5:30,” Kelley said. Monday’s meeting began at 5:38 p.m.

“They also say we should have a mayor at some point, so we can have committees and figure these things out,” Decker said.

A reader, using Cheung’s extraordinary performance in the November elections as a starting point — he earned more votes than any other candidate and surpassed the next closest candidate’s vote total by almost 20 percent, for instance — explained (in her own words) why she hoped Cheung would be a good mayor:

• Not only was he the No. 1 choice of the voters, he has the vision, ability and leadership skills to be an excellent mayor and chair of the School Committee.
• His work on the diversity committee will serve him well in his role as committee chairman.
• His work with MIT and the high-tech community will position him to forge stronger partnerships between Cambridge Public Schools and the science/technology community in Cambridge at a time when our MCAS science scores are low but the curriculum is being revised.
• His knowledge of Kendall Square issues will help him deal with the thorny development issues related to East Cambridge and the schools in that part of the city.

If anyone else wants to weigh in on the mayoral choices, send e-mail here or just use the commenting fields below.

This post was updated Jan. 24, 2012, with the reader comments about Cheung.

For the Planning Board and all concerned it meant revisiting old, unresolved business. In addition to the Bishop petition about crowding the park, the Teague petition meant to stop lights from glaring into neighbors’ homes and yards has been refiled, and an apartment building project that became a poster child for North Cambridge density fears returned as well.

(Image: Charles Teague)

The building, the former Ellis School and North Cambridge Catholic High School at 40 Norris St., was bought in September 2010 by a Somerville developer who hoping to fill it with between 33 and 37 apartments. But neighbors rebelled at the doubling of people and cars on the small street, and a slow municipal process has whittled the plans to 25 units.

On Tuesday, Somerville architect Jai Singh Khalsa showed proposed three-level apartments of “very dramatic space” and rattled off details of libraries, master suites and loft areas as well as noting the site’s proposed 27 parking spaces (including slots for visitors and a Zipcar), 25 bike spaces and an equal number of basement storage areas, 1,037 square feet of common area and ground-floor business or live/work space. Wary neighbors said the latest round of changes arrived without giving them a chance to weigh in adequately, and Planning Board members decided to bump the project to its Feb. 21 meeting while gathering more written comment.

Neighbors “are still very much concerned with the density of this project,” resident Young Kim said — perhaps using it as a proxy for the 1,400 units estimated to be on the way in addition to the 333 that have been built in the area in past five years.

Among the proposals was replacing the Fawcett Oil site with 77 units of housing — down from 104, attorney James Rafferty reminded the board and packed audience — but the plan hasn’t even been filed. During public comment about the Bishop petition, board chairman Hugh Russell had to ask speakers repeatedly to stop commenting on the Fawcett plans. (Rafferty said the project, expected to be filed within the next four months, was almost completely within Bishop petition zoning rules.)

But the site is at the center of a multistreet traffic triangle defined by Massachusetts Avenue, Route 16 and the linear park, a tangle of small streets, massive roadways, illegal turns and already lengthening rush-hour traffic jams. Charles Teague, whose name is on the glare petition but who gave presentations on both citizen-written zoning proposals, testified to counting 54 illegal turns within 45 minutes by drivers trying to avoid getting trapped in traffic.

“The intensity and density is becoming overwhelming,” Brookford Street resident Merhi Sater said. “We are adding traffic after traffic. Our streets are becoming a nightmare.”

Among several people commenting on the effect the density would have on the character of their neighborhood was Gary Dmytryk, representing a 42-unit condo association at 2440 Massachusetts Ave., who said that some residents “even think the Bishop petition is too high” in the development it allows. Councillor David Maher, who dealt with the petition as mayor last year, is proposing in a policy order to be heard Monday that a hearing on it be held at 4 p.m. Feb. 8.

Teague petition looks at lights

There was also plenty of citizen support for the Teague petition, but Teague’s attempt to find simple language defining intrusive lighting and an easy test for city inspectors to follow didn’t win over the experts. There was even concern about the language from an expert who was also a citizen: Glenn Heinmiller, of the Cambridge-based Lam Partners Inc. architectural lighting design firm.

“I totally, totally support the intent of the petition. I’m constantly amazed by what my fellow citizens put up with in terms of light trespass. Obviously a remedy is needed,” Heinmiller told the board. “I’m a little concerned about the language, [which would mean] just about every light in Cambridge would be a glare source and potentially in violation now. Maybe some improvement in this language is required.”

When the board asked for his input on proper language, he called it “a daunting problem” verging on the subjective. “I don’t really have anything for you, to be honest,” he said, having suggested that an alternative to a citizen trying to write law addressing common light complaints would be for the city to write “a proper lighting ordinance.”

Overlay district encourages businesses

One thing the city has been writing: a North Massachusetts Avenue Improvement Study aimed at keeping the area between Porter Square and Arlington a lively mix of housing, services, restaurants and other businesses that encourages people to walk or at least get out of their cars long enough to spend time and money. The result could be an “overlay district” in which parking requirements for restaurants are loosened to encourage outdoor seating and building density can be greater so long as a developer installs ground-floor business space and not just housing.

It “removes the current disincentive to creating mixed-use buildings,” according to the study, by maintaining the allowed size of purely commercial buildings, decreasing the allowed size of purely residential buildings and letting developers go bigger if they include commercial space. The study includes a chart showing the proposed change, with the allowed size of housing-only structures shrinking by 43 percent while housing with retail or office space would be allowed to grow by up to 22 percent.

(Image: City of Cambridge)

This post was updated Jan. 21, 2012, to add Maher’s suggestion for a hearing on the Bishop petition.

Arthur Goldberg, first assistant city solicitor, sent the file Tuesday to Cambridge Day and The Cambridge Chronicle, which have been seeking minutes of the meetings since at least mid-September, when the Monteiro case was settled, and mid-October, with the settling of two remaining civil rights lawsuits against the city.

The notes cover eight closed-door meetings taking place between June 9, 2008, and Sept. 26, 2011, with all but three presenting only very basic information after redaction by the city: what time the meeting began and ended, for instance, who was present and outlines of actions such as that an attorney “summarized what has happened in the litigation since last June.”

The most extensive minutes cover a meeting of June 15, 2009, after a jury had awarded Monteiro $4.5 million. The city had to decide whether to appeal, and after then mayor Denise Simmons got an update from City Manager and attorney Joan Lukey, “there ensued among members a discussion.” Among the issues raised, with no names of councillors attached:

• “The amount of money involved makes the case worthy of appeal even without any other issues. It is really important for the City Council to be responsible even if the public, which does not have all the facts, is upset.”
• “The city  should not set a precedent of not appealing a $6 million judgment. If the city does not appeal, what incentive is there for a plaintiff to settle?” (Another point was that informal discussions with other attorneys suggested it was wise to appeal “even if the city’s ultimate desire is to settle.” But it was also said later the same meeting that the council “should get its own second opinion.”)
• “The case is not and has never been about money. It is about fairness. Firing the plaintiff five years after she went to graduate school on city time looks like discrimination.”
• “Other city employees who have done lots of bad things as city employees got to keep their jobs. The city should settle this case now.”
• “Despite the fact that the city is losing the PR war, the prudent and wise course is to appeal. What the plaintiff did was egregious.”

By then, the cost to the city had risen to $8.3 million for Monteiro and her lawyer. The Cambridge Chronicle has an accounting suggesting some $12 million was spent on the Monteiro and related cases, including pay for outside counsel.

By Sept. 26, the conflict had become about release of information about the case, rather than the case itself. A closed-door session that evening was used to debate whether information could be released without hurting the city’s position as it wrapped up the three cases. In a roll call vote — the only such vote included in the released documents — the councillors supporting then Mayor David Maher in holding back documents were Henrietta Davis, Craig Kelley, Sam Seidel, Tim Toomey and Maher himself. Those in favor of disclosing information to the public were Leland Cheung, Marjorie Decker, Ken Reeves and Denise Simmons.

Kelley, who made several public attempts to get and release information related to the lawsuits, was asked via e-mail if he would comment on his vote.

“I agreed with the argument that Monteiro was not completely over and until it was, the notes should be retained,” Kelley said. “Which is different from going into executive session in the first place — we abused that option, I feel, and I frequently voted against going into executive session. But once in executive session I felt we should wait until Monteiro was completely done before releasing the minutes.”

In late October, the city’s position was that “despite the public announcement that the city has reached a settlement with Ms. [Linda] Stamper and Ms. [Mary] Wong, the litigation … has not yet been concluded. Therefore, the city’s litigating position could still be jeopardized by premature disclosure of the requested records.”

But Maher cleared the way for release of the information Dec. 29 despite there being no change in status on the Stamper or Wong cases: “As chair of the City Council, it is my opinion that although final judgment has yet to be entered, disclosure at this time no longer jeopardizes the city’s litigating position.”

Maher said after a Jan. 23 council meeting that his change in approach to the meeting minutes came after the final closed-door meeting on the topic, which “allowed the council to learn a lot more” about the cases and find that there were “technical aspects that had changed.” When asked if that referred to a filing of documents in the cases, he thought for a moment and repeated only that “technical aspects that had changed.”

There has been a change in the cases, but it took place Jan. 10 — a joint stipulation of dismissal filed with the state Trial Court:

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL. Pursuant to MASS.R.CIV.P. 41 (a)(1), Plaintiffs Mary Chiu Wong and Linda Stamper Joseph, joined by Defendant City of Cambridge, report that the parties have voluntarily resolved their disputes. They thus stipulate dismissal of this action, with prejudice, waiving all rights of appeal and with all parties bearing their own costs and fees. Plaintiff Malvina Monteiro and Defendant City of Cambridge report that judgment has been fully satisfied and plaintiff’s costs and fees paid, such that this matter is reported by all parties as fully and finally adjudicated or resolved.

The final trial conference set for that day, according to court records, was canceled and not rescheduled.

This post was updated Jan. 19, 2012, with Kelley’s comments and Jan. 23, 2012, with Maher’s comments and information from the trial court.

East Cambridge’s former Edward J. Sullivan Courthouse is more than twice the height allowed in current zoning, but unlikely to shrink as it’s redeveloped, state officials told residents Wednesday. (Photo: Google)

There has been “overwhelming interest” from developers in redeveloping East Cambridge’s massive white elephant — the 22-story (not counting three basement levels and a mezzanine) former Edward J. Sullivan Courthouse — but there are “no proposals yet,” a state official told residents at a Wednesday night presentation and question-and-answer period at East End House.

Forty-nine developers and potential tenants have come through the aged, asbestos-ridden building over the course of three November and December walking tours, including names well-known in Cambridge: Boston Properties, Cabot Cabot & Forbes, The Bulfinch Cos., even the Cambridge Innovation Center. Nine of those cared enough to take a second tour, according to a state website.

They have until Feb. 6 to answer the state’s request for proposals, and one will be selected by June or July to take on the task of clearing asbestos and rebuilding on the remaining steel skeleton, very likely leaving it towering as high and dense as it is now, said Dana J. Harrell, the acting deputy commissioner of real estate for the state’s Division of Capital Management.

“This is me talking, not a successful developer, but I’ve been at this for almost 40 years now. Any developer is probably going to have substantial demolition on the interior — the asbestos is going to be gone — leave the shell and reskin this ugly thing,” Harrell said. “In terms of taking off some floors, anything is possible. But I don’t believe that’s the case.”

The answer disappointed the crowd of more than 50 people at the East Cambridge Planning Team-sponsored event, several of whom suggested lopping off some of the building’s 200-plus feet to bring it closer to what current zoning says is appropriate for the residential area: 80 feet.

Since city officials have told the state that a several-story parking garage across Second Street could be sold or leased long term as part of the redevelopment, recent City Council candidate Charles Marquardt wants the top several floors taken off the building and basically added atop the parking garage, resulting in a lower skyline but roughly equal density. Another resident merely told Harrell that, by having the courthouse forced on it in the 1970s despite protests, “this neighborhood has a burden. You should consider we’ve had the burden of this high-rise all these years, and this jail, and the traffic from the courthouse. I think it’s good for us to get something in return, some kind of remediation … take half the building off!”

Parking, prisoners and other problems

Parking was another big theme for the night, as residents recounted how special parking permits were handed out to courthouse personnel in excess of the 40 Thorndike St. building’s official 50 spaces, crowding streets that only got worse when the nearby One First condos went up some seven years ago, forcing long-timers to park up to five blocks from their homes — then losing even more spaces as Thorndike Street became metered. While neighbors can pay $100 a month for a berth in the garage, they worried even that would be taken from them with the needs of the redevelopment. The current courthouse has 595,000 square feet of space on 1.37 acres zoned to take everything from homes to lab and office space, retail or even a hotel. Office space is going for $42 per square foot in the area, according to Cushman & Wakefield figures cited by the state, and “view tower” space for up to $55 per square foot, resulting in a developer incentive to maintain the building as is.

“Our intent is to have the property work in and for the community, particularly at street level,” Harrell said.

Other complaints included the vicious winds whipping around the courthouse, especially treacherous when the grounds around it are icy, and the continued presence of the 375 Middlesex Jail prisoners that remain on the top four stories of the otherwise empty building. They are expected to be moved by spring of 2013, but in the meantime residents call them a nuisance — noisy when watching sports and loudly crude when they see women and children walking below. “They yell out obscenities to everyone walking in the area and, ‘Hey, fat lady,’” said one not particularly fat resident. “Night and day. And I don’t know why they’re allowed to do it. I couldn’t do it as a private citizen.” Another worry: if an even noisier set of occupants replaces them, or rooftop equipment is added that sounds off whenever air conditioning or venting is turned on inside.

The crowd groaned when Harrell denied asbestos playing a role in why the Middlesex Superior and Cambridge District courts left for other cities, and reminded him of the words of Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley as she demanded the state relocate her offices: “I’m not going to play Russian roulette with employees’ health and safety.” When he described how developers would rid the building of asbestos safely, “bagging” the building completely and creating a vacuum so none would escape, they reminded him of recent work where the “bag” tore in the strong winds swirling around the courthouse.

Another bit of skepticism arose with the request of a state guarantee that the chosen developer would finish what they started at 40 Thorndike. “We’ll prequalify the bidders,” Harrell said. “We won’t guarantee … we can’t.”

The answer didn’t sit well with those familiar with the 4-year-old hole in the ground where Filene’s used to be in Downtown Crossing.

Harrell also couldn’t promise the residents a say in which developer was chosen. But Barbara Broussard, a salty and effective moderator who managed to bring the meeting to a close even before its two-hour time limit, extracted a promise that the state would show the finalists’ proposals, without developers’ names attached, before a decision was made. The state officials, including capital management Commissioner Carole Cornelison, say they are scheduling more meetings with other East Cambridge and Kendall Square groups.

The School Committee meets Dec. 20 in its new chambers at Cambridge Rindge & Latin School, where it heard budget projections showing a $2.7 million shortfall in the next fiscal year. (Photo: Marc Levy)

Cambridge schools are projected to be in the red $2.7 million next year, which looks bad compared with where the district was a year ago — projecting a budget gap of only $600,000 that was later bridged — but good compared with two years ago, when administrators expected a shortfall of $3.7 million.

The estimates, presented to the School Committee by the district’s chief financial officer, Claire Spinner, come with the same qualifier as always: the district and City Manager Robert W. Healy will be working to ensure the gap in funding is again filled, possibly through more local and state money.

Two budget retreats are scheduled: one Jan. 24 focused on the district-restructuring Innovation Agenda; and another Jan. 31. They are scheduled for 6 to 8 p.m. at the Pearl K. Wise Library, inside Cambridge Rindge & Latin School at 459 Broadway.

“We don’t have a lot of play” in closing the budget gap, Spinner said Dec. 20, because so many expenses are beyond administrators‘ control — out-of-district tuition, energy expenditures and transportation, for instance.

The total schools budget is projected to $140.7 million, Spinner said, with the shortfall resulting from the fact expenditures (81 percent of which are salaries and employee benefits) will be up $5.9 million, while revenue (83 percent of which is made up of property taxes, with state aid making up much of the rest) will be up only 2.3 percent, or $3.2 million, after taking out the district’s charter school assessment.

“We hope to get a better charter school assessment,” she said. “We hope the numbers will come down by several hundred thousand dollars.”

Superintendent Jeffrey Young, who said he has met already with the city manager and his staff on budget issues, was optimistic. “I have tremendous confidence we will be able to close the gap,” he told the committee in December, although “I don’t just expect him to wake up tomorrow and write a check to fill the gap.”

Next year’s projections include the $350,000 cost of the Innovation Agenda, which restructures the district to include four “upper schools,” including staffing at those new schools and the elementary schools from which they are being split off. (In March, the estimate was $585,000, Young noted.)

Only 22 students are expected to be added in the next school year, bringing enrollment to 6,330 — a 7.4 percent increase in the student body over the past five years, with Spinner projecting a 6 percent rise in the next five years.

The current level of services elsewhere stayed the same, although $3.7 million is to be spent in step increases and cost of living increases in salaries and wages and $2.3 million in health insurance and pension funding.

Looking ahead five years, with the forecast increasingly shaky toward the end, is simply grim, with the shortfall in two years fiscal years looking like $3.9 million; three years, $7.3 million; four years, $10.3 million; and five years, $13.4 million.

“This is going to be a challenging time,” said councillor David Maher, who was mayor at the time of the meeting.