CORRECTION APPENDED

Cambridge voters will elect nine City Councillors tomorrow from a field of 21 hopefuls who put forth their visions for a more efficient and responsive city government in interviews with The Crimson last week.

As the nine-member legislative body of Cambridge, the Council votes on city ordinances and also hires the City Manager, the city’s chief executive. In January, the councillors will choose one of their number to serve as mayor.

In the two years that have elapsed since the last election for City Council members, Cambridge has worked to confront an ongoing achievement gap in its public schools and a continuing discrimination lawsuit involving the city manager, as well as the local fallout of the national economic crisis.

In light of these issues, the candidates for the city councillor posts—including several first-time candidates and all current incumbents—have been proposing suggestions to improve Cambridge schools, energy use, city finances, and city administration.

CHALLENGING THE MANAGER

Many of the challengers for the councillor positions said they felt compelled to enter the campaign after feeling dissatisfied with the responsiveness of the Council and the amount of power exercised by City Manager Robert W. Healy.

Controversy has swirled around Healy since a May 2008 ruling ordered the city to pay Malvina Monteiro, a former city employee, $4.5 million. Monteiro, who had filed an earlier discrimination complaint against Healy, claimed that he had her fired in 2003 in retaliation. Healy has continued to fight the decision despite an unsuccessful appeal in April.

Challenger Sylvia P. Glick said she perceived a lack of attention from councillors and city residents to the amount that the legal battle is costing the city.

“Why is it that most of the people in Cambridge do not know that the city is controlled by an un-elected city manager who has a $4.5 million jury verdict against him?” Glick said.

In May, the Council considered but did not pass an effort to prevent Healy’s use of city funds to further appeal the 2008 ruling.

Healy, who has been in office for 28 years, has garnered the support of most councillors and has presided over the maintenance of the city’s AAA bond rating. In January, his contract was renewed for another three years by a nearly unanimous vote, in which Councillor Craig A. Kelley was the only one to dissent.

“Too often, almost all of the current City Council [members] do not pay attention to the issues,” said James Williamson, a second-time challenger who expressed pessimism about his election chances but said he hopes to draw attention to the Council’s ineffectiveness.

CONTINUING CONCERNS

Candidates for Council expressed concern regarding not only the lawsuit, but also enduring issues such as school performance, energy efficiency, and economic stability of the city.

Vice Mayor Sam Seidel, who was first elected in 2007, named the improvement of the Cambridge Public School system the “number one issue” of his campaign. He said he is especially concerned with the availability of after-school programs for Cambridge students.

Education also figures largely in the campaign of challenger Neal W. Leavitt ’96, who emphasized the importance of narrowing the achievement gap beginning at a young age.

In regards to the issue of energy efficiency, Councillor Henrietta J. Davis—who was first elected to the Council in 1995—said the Council should continue to push forward initiatives like ensuring the conformity of the city’s new library and its other construction projects to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards developed by the U.S. Green Building Council.

Other candidates also have suggestions for energy efficiency, such as Leavitt’s idea of building an off-shore wind farm in the outer reaches of Boston Harbor.

The city’s fiscal responsibility is another issue of concern to candidates. Cambridge’s city budget grew by 2 percent this fiscal year from the year before—a growth, according to City Manager Healy, that in part alleviates the $9.7 million reduction in state aid to the city.

Challenger Edward J. Sullivan said that the councillors’ pay is too high and ought to be cut before funding is taken from city projects. Sullivan speciftically mentioned a youth summer program in the Area IV neighborhood that had seen reduction in its hours.

GETTING OUT THE VOTE

Despite lively debate among candidates, trends in voter turnout indicate that there may not be a comparable level of enthusiasm from city residents. In the 2007 municipal election, only 13,721 voters cast ballots, although the city boasted nearly 57,000 registered voters at the time.

Figures detailing the number of Harvard students registered to vote in Cambridge are not available, but several candidates said they hoped that university students would turn out at the polls tomorrow.

In fact, first-time challenger Leland Cheung—a student at both Harvard Kennedy School and the MIT Sloan School of Management—said that his campaign focuses on issues highly relevant to students, such as improving public safety and enhancing dialogue between the city and universities.

Five-time incumbent Marjorie C. Decker said last month that she is concerned about voter turnout, especially since she is conducting a write-in campaign. Though Decker failed to file the paperwork necessary to declare official candidacy, she is distributing stickers bearing her name to allow voters to include her in their rankings of candidates.

Harvard students registered to vote in Cambridge can do so at one of several polling locations tomorrow, depending on their residence.

—Staff writer Sarah J. Howland can be reached at showland@fas.harvard.edu.

CORRECTION

An earlier version of the Nov. 3 news article "City To Vote On New Council" incorrectly stated that James M. Williamson was running for City Council for the first time this year. In fact, Williamson also ran for a Council seat in 2001.