News
HMS Is Facing a Deficit. Under Trump, Some Fear It May Get Worse.
News
Cambridge Police Respond to Three Armed Robberies Over Holiday Weekend
News
What’s Next for Harvard’s Legacy of Slavery Initiative?
News
MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal
News
Denied Winter Campus Housing, International Students Scramble to Find Alternative Options
CAMBRIDGE POLITICS will be played for very high stakes in the next few weeks. Though the effects may not be felt for months or even years, realtors and landlords stand to make some very big money from a single city council rollcall. A lot more tenants stand to lose their homes. And the city stands to change dramatically--from an exciting, traditional community into a dull upper-class professional ghetto.
Next Monday, the council will likely consider an amendment to the city's ordinance sharply restricting condominium conversions. The amendment would specifically exempt two buildings--36-42 Linnaean St. and 4-6 Washington Ave.--from the ordinance, allowing many of the tenants to act on their wish to purchase their homes as condominiums. Singling out one building in a specific ordinance makes precious little sense. Enforcement of the law should remain the prerogative of the Rent Control Board. If there is any special hardship for any apartment dweller, they can deal with it.
The far-reaching effects of such an ordinance, though, are scary. Currently, developers are suing the city in an effort to overturn the ordinance. If the amendment exempting two buildings was ever passed, surely any sensible judge would be tempted to throw the entire law out the window as a gross violation of equal protection. And if that happens, the condo gold rush will be on again and every tenant in the city will once more live in fear. The law protects all tenants too poor to buy their own apartments, and guarantees that there will be rental housing in the city in the years to come. No single statute, save perhaps the rent control law, is more important to Cambridge's future.
We urge every Independent member of the council to vote against the proposed amendment; the councilors endorsed by the Cambridge Civic Association seem solidly opposed to the measure. Most likely, councilor Alfred E. Vellucci will be the swing vote. Though he is rightly angered by the weak support he, in many ways the best friend city tenants have ever had, received from local liberals in last month's election, Vellucci has always before shown his compassion on important votes. We hope he will once more vote to save the diversity of Cambridge.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.