Slow Shift to Center Continues; Healy May Be on Way Out

If early returns hold, Cambridge residents have chosen a decidedly moderate council to lead it into the 21st century.

And it looks like the longtime city manager, Robert W. Healy, may not be joining it.

Last night, the city's star progressive, Katherine Triantafillou, was battling for the final spot on the council late last night with David P. Maher, a member of the school committee, and Bob Goodwin, a local parent. (Because of the city's proportional representation voting system, it is difficult to predict winners from preliminary results.)

While city voters appeared to return to office at least five of the six incumbents seeking re-election, they gave a plurality of their support to the council's most conservative member, Vice Mayor Anthony D. Galluccio.

And two newcomers--Marjorie C. Decker and James S. Braude--are polished political veterans who established strong neighborhood bases before running.

It looks like Cambridge's old-time liberals may be on their way out, as Mayor Francis H. Duehay '55 and former mayor Sheila Doyle Russell are retiring, and less temperate politicians are taking their places.

Duehay's solid middle-class supporters likely threw their weight behind Braude, a former labor lawyer and now media consultant.

And Decker received every major endorsement of note and had solid name recognition even she before decided to run for council.

A long-time aide to State Rep. Alice K. Wolf (D-Cambridge), Decker stressed care for senior citizens and a commitment to affordable housing.

Why Triantafillou was barely hanging on to a hope of a fourth term in office was debated last night.

Some argued she had become aloof in recent months; others said she ran lackluster campaign, not trying hard enough to distinguish herself from other candidates with similar views.

Fall Guy

Ironically, the man who could be most affected by today's election results didn't even run.

If this morning's final vote tallies for the city council race are any indication, powerful city manager Healy could well be out of a job this time next year.

Several councillors have said it is time for a new face to take the helm of Cambridge's municipal bureaucracy. The City Council has the power to make this change by deciding not to extend his contract in Fall 2000.

At last count, the three incumbents who supported Healy's ouster were re-elected, and Braude and Decker, whose campaigns advocated decreasing his power, have won their first terms in office.

On the surface, it is difficult to see why Healy isn't popular.

During his 18-year term as city manager, he consolidated the city's debt, streamlined the payroll without firing employees, and, along with city finance director James D. Maloney, helped to make Cambridge one of the best-run cities in the nation.

The council hasn't had much direct input about how the city is managed. It appoints the city manager and passes broad resolutions, but Healy writes the city's regulations. He is the de-facto head of public works, of public safety and of city financing.

But his successes are also a reason why Healy has stirred resentment on the council.

Triantafillou, a long-time councillor, has said that Healy's performance as manager has ignored the city's economically disadvantaged, and she wants the council to adopt more of a role in policy formation.

For example, she proposed to make the city's planning board, which in many instances has final say on zoning issues, accountable to the council instead of the city manager.

Critics charge that doing this would make the planning board more responsive to political winds, which tend to overtly favor liberal causes.

For the apparently successful Jim Braude, it's also Healy's power that is troubling.

One of Braude's themes has been to stress that the council should take more control of day-to-day city governance, without micromanaging the nitty-gritty.

And at least one incumbent, Kenneth E. Reeves '72--who had a tentative position on the council at first count--has made Healy-bating his centerpiece.

So strong is the force against the city manager and his power, according to Frank A. Pedro, chair of the Cambridge Democratic City Committee, that almost every one of the 24 candidates has expressed a desire to recast the city government in some way.

"Currently, Healy is dictating policy more than he should," Pedro said.

Hence, structural reform of the city was the centerpiece of many of the candidate's campaigns.

Despite the seemingly arcane detail of city government and a near unanimity of liberal political

sentiment, the controversy over Healy signifies that Cambridge is still a fractured city.

It is numerically prosperous. An average annual wage of more than $45,000 makes it one of the richest cities in the state. Unemployment for residents has dipped below 2.5 percent. Spending per student is more than twice the state's average. There are many new businesses and posh commercial properties. Home values are high.

Still, the problems are many.

There remain pockets of poor Cantabrigians, many of them longtime residents of the city. And the city is densely populated, with little green space.

The high school drop out rate is higher than the state average and SAT scores are lower.

This is the backdrop for the city-wide elections following the end of rent control in 1995.

Whoever runs the City Council and manages the city must deal with the two conflicting trends, which manifest themselves in an increasing degree of economic inequality in the city.

Though the council seems to be becoming more moderate, that doesn't mean its marathon sessions are over.

"You could no more expect a City Council to remain quiet than you

could expect a Harvard section to remain quiet," said perennial Cambridge pundit Glenn S. Koocher '71.