The issue transcends even the question of political power. Cambridge Model Cities will inevitably be run either by a group of professional outsiders on the CDA staff, or by a group of professional outsiders from City Hall. The structure makes very little difference.
The people who fill the structure, however, make a great deal of difference. The conflict is as simple as the fact that the CDA staff is comprised of liberals who want to expand the scope and responsibility of city government in social welfare; while City Hall is dominated by conservatives who are afraid to extend the fiscal involvement of the city.
This is not a question of political power; that question has already beensolved. It is a clash of ideologies, and in the balance hangs a variety of potentially brilliant programs to aid the aged, the children, the poor and the working class.
The crucial matter here is not one of who will direct the Cambridge Model Cities program, but the more immediately relevant one of in what direction it will be directed.
Robert J. LeBlanc, the young assistant to Corcoran, gave his office's viewpoint that "legally the City Manager cannot obligate the city for this kind of future expenditure. It simply exceeds our power."
In reply, Robert B. Williams, the Executive Director of the CDA staff, commented, "That may be called fiscal responsibility, but if you think about it, it's also pretty damn repressive."
Cambridge Model Cities is doing some great things, and given the opportunity, it should do more. This is precisely what City Hall fears most-that successful programs will develop their own lives, and that once Model Cities fades out of the picture, the city government may have to pick up the slack with ever-increasing expenditures further straining the budget.
Model Cities, it should be noted, operates on a five-year schedule. After 1973 there will be no federal funds to support CDA services, and if the people want these services continued, responsibility will devolve upon City Hall. Local politicians don't want to spend that much money, and consequently they put the squeeze on Model Cities now, effectively shutting out any more successful programs from starting.
The squeeze, however, comes from above as well as below. Model Cities is funded by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Nixon administration has wrought a reversal of policy within HUD. In line with "New Federalism"-and also in line with lower priorities for social welfare legislation-HUD has increasingly accented the role of city government in CDA decision-making, as opposed to neighborhood action. Cambridge, which at least on paper provides for more local control than any other Model City in the country, was a logical target for the re-alignment process.
The concept of resident control, in fact, was doomed from the start-a glorious idea that simply couldn't work. The major benefits from CDA have not diffused to all neighborhood residents-although the Cambridge project is the second smallest in the country. The ones who benefit from Model Cities services are the aggressive types, the go-getters, the volunteers-precisely the ones who need assistance the least.
The CDA staff should have gone into the community long ago, and it is ironic that only in a desperate attempt to save its life is it fulfilling the purpose for which it was set up. Had there been the type of community interaction originally envisioned, the present crisis might have been averted.
A lot of good things can be done in the Cambridge Model Cities neighborhood and some of them are already beginning. The fundamental question becomes, "How far can we go?" This is the issue the Model Cities people should be talking about, and this is the crucially important decision for the future-not a rhetorical slogan that tries to capitalize on nonexistent local autonomy.
It is unfair and unethical to use the people of the model neighborhood as pawns in the clash of ideologies, but that is what is being done.
The tragedy of the situation is the bleakness of the future. By trying to rally support, and by forcing the issue, the CDA only hastens the inevitable final showdown. And when that confrontation comes, the City Solicitor and the City Manager can legally opine them right out of existence.
The Model Cities staff has thrown itself into a seemingly unresolvable dilemma. The harder they work, the sooner they die. Perhaps a sudden flare-up is preferable to a lingering death, but some residents disagree, and the staff itself is divided. The Model Cities agency can do a lot of good things in Cambridge, but when it becomes so enmeshed in politics and ???