Unlawful Cambridge City Council Actions?

Unlawful Cambridge City Council Actions?

Citizen participation is essential even when the process is delegated to a
private not for profit agency. The reported actions of two City Councilors raise
other issues. (Janice O'Leary, "In this nook, too much affordability?" Boston
Globe, August 26, 2007)
All too often in Massachusetts the end justifies the means. Stopping the
development process to permit citizen input may result from unlawful actions by
two Cambridge City Councilors. Mass General Laws Ch. 43 Sec. 107 prohibits
direct contact between Councilors and city officials except for informational
purposes.
Asking the Planning Board to postpone their decision looks like a violation
of that law. The penalties are severe. But not many laws are being enforced in
Mass for malfeasance. Cambridge is a lawless city. Its academic leaders exploit
this flaw.
It is so pervasive now with one-party rule firmly in place that the
Governor openly encourages ignoring a statute that is inconvenient for his most
powerful supporters. This is a disgrace in a city which boasts of a prestigious
school of government and two international academic institutions.
What is being taught at these schools?

[This is an online copy of the statute. It may not be official, but it is
close.]
PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE VII. CITIES, TOWNS AND DISTRICTS
CHAPTER 43. CITY CHARTERS
PLAN E.—GOVERNMENT BY A CITY COUNCIL INCLUDING A MAYOR ELECTED FROM ITS
NUMBER, AND A CITY MANAGER, WITH ALL ELECTIVE BODIES ELECTED AT LARGE BY
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

Chapter 43: Section 107. Interference with city manager by council forbidden;
penalty

Section 107. Neither the city council nor any of its committees or members shall
direct or request the appointment of any person to, or his removal from, office
by the city manager or any of his subordinates, or in any manner take part in
the appointment or removal of officers and employees in that portion of the
service of said city for whose administration the city manager is responsible.
Except for the purpose of inquiry, the city council and its members shall deal
with that portion of the service of the city as aforesaid solely through the
city manager, and neither the city council nor any member thereof shall give
orders to any subordinate of the city manager either publicly or privately. Any
member of the city council who violates, or participates in the violation of,
any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than five
hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or both, and
upon final conviction thereof his office in the city
council shall thereby be vacated and he shall never again be eligible for any
office or position, elective or otherwise, in the service of the city.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor, ENOUGH ROOM


CAMBRIDGE
In this nook, too much affordability?
Residents decry 16-unit proposal for Windsor Street
By Janice O'Leary,
Boston Globe Correspondent
August 26, 2007

East Cambridge residents felt the squeeze at Tuesday night's Planning Board
meeting, but that was nothing new for this group. They feel their elbow room
encroached upon daily in their part of town.

East Cambridge, with its estimated 71 people per acre, is the densest part of a
city deemed the fifth-densest in the country by some data crunchers. Residents
fed up with new housing creating more traffic, more noise, less space, and more
trash for rats to feast on let the Planning Board know it last week.

They crowded a second-floor conference room in the City Hall Annex, lining up
against the walls and overflowing into the hallway. There were no open seats as
they protested a local developer's proposed conversion of a former church into
16 affordable-housing units.

"We're not against affordable housing," said John Raulinaitis, who has lived in
East Cambridge for 79 years. "We're against housing, period."

Just-a-Start Corp., a 36-year-old local nonprofit organization, purchased the
Immaculate Conception Lithuanian Church property earlier Tuesday for $1.425
million. Many residents did not know the sale had taken place and were angered
by the way the nonprofit dealt with neighbors about it.

"I don't appreciate how they've handled the process," said Donna Barry, a
neighbor who said she was undecided about the proposed housing itself.

Just-a-Start made an offer on the property May 23, but did not meet with
neighbors until Aug. 14, just one week before the sale.

Regarding the lack of public involvement, the project's manager, Beatriz Gómez,
said, "We wish we had done a better job."

Vice Mayor Timothy Toomey and City Councilor Craig Kelley agreed and asked that
the Planning Board suspend any decision about whether to issue the nonprofit the
necessary permit to move forward with the conversion until neighbors and
Just-a-Start could hash out an agreeable plan.

The members of the Planning Board agreed to postpone a decision until neighbors'
concerns had been addressed.
[...]