Cambridge reconsiders changing its mind

Council ponders tinkering with bylaw to hear delegations after vote over

CAMBRIDGE— Greg Durocher came to speak on a casino. Cambridge city council told him to get lost.

“We still like you,” Mayor Doug Craig told Durocher. “It’s just that we’re not going to listen to you.”

So Durocher, the president of the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce, silently left city hall with- out speaking a word on behalf of 1,880 city businesses.

The democratic optics were not flattering that night of March 25.

Maybe the issue of a potential casino for Cambridge had been dead since October, killed by a 5-4 vote of council. Much had changed since then. Woolwich was in the game and threatening to wheel and deal on the outskirts of Cambridge.

Durocher just wanted to bend nine sets of ears. Council rules plugged all nine.

“That was a fiasco,” city councillor Frank Monteiro said on Thursday as he crafted the wording for a potential bylaw to prevent council from giving the bum’s rush to any delegation again. “That night, my blood pressure was tilting because this is so ridiculous.”

Monteiro, a retired beat cop, felt handcuffed by the rules the mayor says this council passed unanimously early in the term.

All motions to reconsider a past issue now require a mover and seconder who both initially voted against the motion.

So if Durocher was to speak, then the casino matter had to be reopened by two of the five councillors who closed it.

That procedural ruling was made by the mayor, after consulting with the city clerk.

“It’s my call,” Craig said on Thursday.

None of the five, including the mayor, cared to reopen the matter to hear Durocher.

Therefore, with the mayor’s ruling unchallenged, Durocher was told to collect his chips and go home.

Durocher has had hard luck at city hall before. After nine years on council, he lost the race for the mayor’s seat to Craig by 26 votes in 2000. Now, snake eyes again.

Durocher said Thursday he doesn’t take the snub personally nor does he consider it a slap in the chamber’s face. Still, he suspected the ruling was more politically motivated.

“They just didn’t want to open a can of worms, or a perceived can of worms,” Durocher said.

“Some people, oh boy, once they make a decision, they want it to go away and never haunt them again. And I understand that, to some degree. I’ve been there.”

Monteiro doesn’t want such a situation to arise again. He wants to tinker with the bylaws to ensure citizens aren’t shown the door without a say.

“I consider city hall as the house of the people of Cambridge,” Monteiro said. “As long as city council has jurisdiction, we should not turn down anybody who wants to come to city hall as a delegation to tell us something. They should be allowed.”

Monteiro, who has consulted with the mayor and other councillors, doesn’t expect to have his motion ready for today’s general committee meeting.

But it’s coming. And Craig says his ears are open to reasonable changes to an admittedly restrictive bylaw.

“I think we can look at some modifications,” Craig said. “I have no problem with that.”

So council is poised to reconsider its reconsideration bylaw.

But will that require a motion of reconsideration?

“Yes,” Craig said.