Higher parking fees on the way, and perhaps direct election of mayors

City Council appears to have settled on a fee structure for resident parking permits, for now.

Starting next year, residents will pay $75 for an annual parking permit, up from $25, the cost since 2013. However, residents for whom $75 constitutes a financial hardship can check a box when applying for or renewing their sticker and get it for free.

A policy order approving the new structure passed 7-2. A late amendment courtesy of Vice Mayor Burhan Azeem was added to the order, requiring the city to report back to council how many residents take the exemption.

This is the fourth time council has debated parking fees since February. It first tinkered with the fee structure back in March in an effort to cover the cost of issuing permits, which the city department of transportation claims is about $3 million.

The proposal drew immediate backlash from older Cantabrigians because it eliminated free parking stickers for all seniors. Some of them said that even a $25 increase for low-income seniors was too much.

“Cambridge seniors are being asked to absorb one more burden,” said Cambridge resident Valerie Bonds during public comment. “Part of the exemption is a recognition of the commitment that seniors have made to this community.”

Critics have said the policy change will disproportionately affect low-income seniors. McGovern pointed out, though, that this argument applied to low-income residents of any age.

“I want the people who can afford to pay full price to pay full price, and the people who can’t to not have to regardless of their age,” McGovern said.

The policy order originally before the council Monday requested the city manager’s office to assess how removing the exemption would affect seniors.  Councillor E. Denise Simmons, who has been the council’s most vocal opponent of the fee, was the lead sponsor.

But McGovern offered an amendment to replace that language with changing the fee structure to allow senior citizens to avoid a fee by checking a box claiming financial hardship..

“This, I think, is a good compromise,” McGovern said. “Seniors will continue to pay zero if they check that box, as will people of any age.”

McGovern’s amendment narrowly passed 5-4, with Azeem and Simmons along with councillors Timothy Flaherty and Patty Nolan voting against it. Councillor Cathie Zusy had voted with Flaherty and Simmons on this issue previously, but this time broke with them to vote in favor of the amendment. She offered tepid support for the new fee structure, saying she would like to think of it as a one-year “pilot.”

Unlike other city benefits, residents with cars won’t have to provide any proof of income to obtain the exemption.

Azeem expressed concern that too many residents will take the exemption.

“If you ask me, ‘Hey, do you have an extra 75 bucks, lying around?’ I’m not feeling great about [giving] 75 extra bucks, right?” Azeem said “I both support what we’re trying to do here, but I also worry that … if 50 percent of the people decide to check the box, that’s one and a half million dollars.” He said it could be a high-impact decision.

Azeem added the amendment requiring the city to review how many people take the exemption but along with Flaherty voted against the overarching policy order.

How to select a mayor

Seven members of city council also voted to explore direct mayoral elections, a policy order that could reshape the role of mayor. Currently, city councillors vote for mayor once they are sworn in at the start of a new term. While the mayor plays an important role enforcing procedure in council meetings and has ceremonial significance, the job has little formal power beyond that of a typical councillor, as the city manager serves as the city administration’s chief executive.

 Some cities allow candidates to run for only one office at a time, meaning office-seekers would have to pick mayor or council. That option could dramatically reshape Cambridge’s city council. Other options would be an instant-runoff system where candidates can put themselves out for both mayor and councillor.

The city will work with the Collins Center at the University of Massachusetts Boston to review options for electing a mayor. The Collins Center also assisted with last year’s charter review process

Resulting changes to the city’s charter could go further than the matter of electing a mayor, though. Simmons introduced an amendment calling for the Collins Center to also prepare a “neutral review of the unresolved governance questions that emerged from the recent charter review process,” which could also include “the role and authority of the mayor, the relationship between the city council and the city manager, and the public engagement process that would be necessary before any further charter amendment is advanced.”

Simmons said the purpose of the amendment was to make sure that the voices of communities that weren’t engaged during last year’s charter review process are heard.

“If we go down that road again, are we going to do it the same way, or are we going to work even harder to get more voices at the table?” Simmons said.

In Cambridge’s governmental structure, the city manager has broad executive authority, including recommending the municipal budget and property tax rates, and overseeing large departments like Cambridge’s police force.

“I do think there’s a balance issue,” Nolan said, supporting the amendments.

Councillor Ayah Al-Zubi introduced an amendment to explore electing the city manager. “I believe residents should be able to elect their own executive based on the principle of what democracy should look like,” she said.

“That’s a whole different ballgame,” McGovern countered.

Her amendment was voted down by 7 to 2, with only Councillor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler joining her.

Al-Zubi voted present in the resulting policy order, while Zusy voted against it, repeating her objections from the prior week. “We already spent half a year debating these things,” Zusy said. “It’s time to move on and really focus on advancing the city.”

A stronger

Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.

We are now a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.

Please consider a recurring contribution.

Donate now