The political compromises which last week led to the choice of Sheila Russell as the next mayor of Cambridge will likely mark her tenure in that office. Although Russell is the original candidate of the Alliance for Change party, she isn't likely to make any big changes at all. Because of all the recent deal making shepherded by Frank M. Duehay '55 fostering the new incumbency, Cambridge is about to witness a stable, but ineffectual city government.

Russell's personal history endows her with a solid knowledge of and a good feel for Cambridge, its residents and their history. Her deceased husband, Leonard, previously served as mayor. Since his death in 1985, she has served on the City Council, pushing for such issues delimiting the hiring practices of the schools and the police department to city residents. Now, Russell says, it's her turn to be mayor. We believe the mayor of Cambridge should provide higher vision than provincial ambition.

Under the Russell administration, inertia will be the guiding force of Cambridge's municipal government. Russell says, "We don't need to make any dramatic political changes." Such a legislative laissez-faire stance is probably how she got into office in the first place, given the stubborn partisan voting of city council members. After all, would the more liberal Cambridge Civic Association have funneled their four votes her way if she was promising action? Nevertheless, we would like to offer an agenda for the city so that Russell can lead while supported by a greater consitutuency than her fellow council members.

On the issue of Harvard's conversion of 700 Cambridge apartments to affiliate housing, Russell wants to see more than 20 percent permanently set aside for low-income tenants. Perhaps this stance is due to her loyalty to the elderly constituency, but if Russell really wants to promote a greater city than she will not force this issue upon the University. As a member of the more conservative local party, she understands that the real estate market functions most efficiently when it is under private ownership and unburdened by price controls. Massachusetts has abolished rent-control; so we hope that she abides by the law.

Cambridge's public schools are also in need of a strong guiding force which we hope Russell, as head of the Schools Committee, will be able to provide. The major issue over the next year will be the selection of a new superintendent to replace Mary Lou McGrath, who is not expected to renew her soon-to-expire contract. Thankfully, Russell supports the institution of a national search process to hire the finest administrator for the job. Unfortunately, though, Russell insists that the superintendent must move to Cambridge within a year. We believe that, as is the case with a police officer, if he or she can make the commute, residency should not be an issue determining his or her job status.

We concur with Counciler and former mayor Kenneth A. Reeves '72 that the schools themselves are in need of an influx of energy and talent. Russell answers Reeves: "He was there for four years. If he didn't reinvigorate it then, you know, what did he expect to do now?" Perhaps she will be the one to institute many of the programs developed under Reeves' administration. For example, the Technology 2000 initiative, which seeks to place a computer in every classroom, must be vigorously pursued. And current talk about charter or magnet schools should also be followed up with serious consideration. Just as the school system evolved from a dual system of technical and scholastic education into the unified Rindge & Latin secondary school, so Cambridge's educational structure must again evolve to prepare youth for the New Economic Order based on information technology and international competition.

Among other issues of importance, crime in Cambridge, and around the Harvard campus in particular, seems to be on the rise. Russell must keep the local police forces vigilant in protecting Cambridge residents and Harvard students. Also significant over the next year will be the architectural renovation of Harvard Square. We hope that Mayor Russell keeps historic preservation in mind when acting for community improvement.

We are disappointed that the City Council failed to reinstate Reeves as mayor. Over the past four years, Reeves has proved to be a dynamic and involved city leader. He has concerned himself with the multifarious elements of the Cambridge community and has paid special heed to the concerns of Harvard students. The years to follow under Russell will hopefully be more pro-active than it appears from her recent statements. We are encouraged by her reasonable positions on the important issue of superintendent selection, but hope that her the mayoral office doesn't lose its current status as an active bully pulpit as the result of compromises like the one which put her into office.