After years of fighting with the Cambridge Election Commission and in the courts for the right to register to vote in the city, student voters will find that their first unhampered chance to vote in a Cambridge City Council election will feature fewer candidates and fewer issues than any in the last the years.

Only 5 candidates are going after the nine $6500-a-year jobs the city biannually offers to its residents, down from 34 in 1973 and 3 in 1971.

The new state law went into effect July 1 permits any citizen over 18 years old to register to vote in Cambridge by declaring Cambridge to be his residence, clearing the way for large numbers of students to sign up before registration closes on October 15.

Since World War II, the city has been organized according to the so-called "Plan E," which features a strong city manager chosen by a relatively weak nine-member city council elected every two years by a complex proportional representation system of voting.

Immediately after taking office, the councilors choose one of their own to serve as mayor, a process that can take several months and, in 1948, took 1233 ballots. The mayor chairs the Monday night city council meetings, acts as chairman ex-officio of the six-member school committee and is the ceremonial head of the city.

The city manager, appointed by the council, is the administrative head of the city and legally holds most of the municipal power. Cambridge's charter makes it clear that only the city manager and his staff directly handle municipal affairs and can order civil servants to do specific jobs. City councilors who try to tamper with this process risk a $500 fine and a six-month prison sentence.

Nevertheless, since the city manager can be removed at any time by five councilors' votes, the council's "requests" to the manager are almost always obeyed.

But shifting alignments in the council have meant new faces in the city manager's office; the job has changed hands after four of the last five elections.

Although technically city politics are non-partisan, Cambridge is overwhelmingly Democratic and the spectrum usually runs from middle to left. In the middle are the so-called Independents who now control a five-man majority on the council with varying degrees of success. After 30 unsuccessful ballots for mayor in January 1974, when the present council took office, two Independents, Walter J. Sullivan and Leonard J. Russell, joined forces with the liberal faction of the council to elect themselves mayor and vice-mayor, in exchange for their votes to replace then-City Manager John Corcoran with James L. Sullivan. Since that split, the independents have not been a really cohesive political force and no "Independent Slate" has surfaced in this fall's election.

The main issues in the past few elections has been the appointments of the city manager, school superintendent and chief of police. This year, however, Sullivan, who was also city manager in 1971, is just resettling into the post. William C. Lannon has just taken charge of the schools and Francis Pisani is adjusting to leading the police department. Almost all the candidates agree that it's just too soon to even talk about replacement.

Without these warhorse issues to debate, the old backburner issues--development, taxes, rent control, and crime--are taking on a new importance, although differences among the candidates seem to be more of degree than substance.

Development could turn into the big issue of an otherwise lackluster campaign. After a 5-4 vote last spring to approve the Kendall Square project, the city found that they couldn't attract any developers. Councilor Daniel J. Clinton blames this on the economy, but Saundra Graham said she believes that "no developers are going to come in on a 5-4 vote, because they know that an election could boot them out."

The fate of the city's neighborhoods, always an emotional topic, could also become an issue. Housing projects, both low-income and luxury high-rise, are springing up around the city and some candidates might try a "preserve Cambridge for the average people" approach.

All candidates said that they are concerned about the high property tax rates in Cambridge, which are among the highest rates in the state, that unemployment in Cambridge is at intolerable levels, that they worry about the growing incidence of crime on the city's streets and that some amount of rent control is useful.

The liberal incumbents, all endorsed by Cambridge Convention '75, see pretty much eye-to-eye on these issues, pulling for strong rent control and a reduced tax rate. In fact, Graham predicts that City Manager Sullivan will announce a reduced tax rate within several weeks.

Any reduction, however, would have to be looked at in light of last year's $33 increase in the tax rate (based on $1000 assessed valuation). Clinton, an independent, has already warned he may charge Sullivan with using the tax rate for political purposes if the new rate appears unusually low.

While none of the candidates wants to eliminate all rent controls, there is more diversity of opinion on this issue than on any other. Challenger Denis Barber '60 said that, although rent control may be desirable in the short run, in the long run it hurts the housing supply by discouraging new construction. This view cost him the support of the new liberal interest group, Convention '75.

Independent incumbent Alfred E. Velluci has sided with the liberal minority several times in the past year to preserve rent control and remains committed to it. The other incumbent independents--Mayor Sullivan, Vice-Mayor Russell, Daniel J. Clinton and Thomas W. Danehy--have all voted at various times to remove some rent controls.

Several other issues could arise between now and the Nov. 4 election, depending on whether or not the candidates want to push them. The dealings between the city and the universities--Harvard and MIT--are usually good for some political mileage.

Though potential issues abound, the chances are slim that much will become of them. "I've never seen such a quiet campaign in Cambridge," three-term Councilor Clinton said last week. "For the first time in my memory, there are no serious threats among the challengers, and the small number of candidates is going to help the incumbents.