The power-to-the-people platform

It’s no wonder political observers have placed their bets on the above slate. Quiet campaign seasons, after all, favor incumbents and insiders. Yet Cambridge residents who’ve grown sick of the same old rules might toss aside the received wisdom. This year’s council ballot happens to include four experienced community advocates hoping to reach fellow Cantabrigians who feel increasingly detached from local politics. And these citizen candidates, if you will, cannot be counted out yet — or at least some of them can’t.

Topping the list is John Pitkin, who for 28 years has headed the Mid-Cambridge Neighborhood Association. He hopes to capitalize on support from the departing Braude, who carries clout among liberal activists in the area that stretches from Central to Harvard Squares. Political junkies consider Pitkin a qualified candidate who lacks hard-core campaign skills. And he admits he doesn’t enjoy the glad-handing. "I prefer block parties to one-line introductions," he says. Still, he’s got a strong record: he drafted the 1997 Pitkin Petition, which led the current council to rezone the city and slow down commercial development. His name, as pundit Glenn Koocher puts it, "is known among zoning groupies." And when Pitkin speaks of "giving voice to neighborhoods," he means it. "I have lived this belief," he says.

Other citizen candidates include Ethridge King, an energetic development director at Boston University who’s busily mobilizing votes in the Cambridgeport and Riverside neighborhoods. Because King lacks an activist rŽsumŽ, observers figure he won’t be able to muster the numbers to squeak onto the council. But King — a tall, attractive, intelligent candidate who grew up in the city — has generated buzz as a real up-and-comer. And he’s set out to woo the disaffected folks who are upset about the city’s rapidly changing landscape. Cambridge "has taken a turn for the worse, and people are frustrated," he says. "It bothers me."

Keep an eye out, too, for Jacob Horowitz, who, at 24, is the youngest candidate on the ballot. The first-time challenger — editor of the Jewish Advocate — comes across as an amiable, honest guy whose diligent canvassing in Central Square could benefit him. ("I’m the non-politician. My intentions are pure," says Horowitz, evidently overlooking the conflict involved when a news editor runs for political office.) The same can be said of James Williamson, an activist whose far-left sensibilities make him a wild card. Williamson doesn’t plan to win; rather, he’s running to highlight what he calls the "underlying problem" behind the city’s high rents, displaced residents, and overdevelopment. "There’s a link between these," he says, "and the system’s absence of citizen power and real democracy."

Party candidates

By law, the Cambridge City Council is supposed to be a nonpartisan body. But some candidates are banking on political affiliations to distinguish themselves from the rest of the pack. Foremost among them is Steve Iskovitz, the Green Party candidate who jokes that his presence in the election, unlike that of Ralph Nader in the 2000 presidential race, "won’t get George W. elected." Among other proposals, Iskovitz is pushing to require the largest 25 corporations based in Cambridge to pay all employees the $10.68 per hour outlined in the Cambridge living-wage ordinance, which applies only to city and city-contracted workers.

On the other side of the political spectrum is Steven Jens, a Republican whose campaign centers almost exclusively on property rights. Libertarian candidate James Condit offers an antidote to what he terms "the old-school, big-government incumbents" on the council. And how about Vince Dixon — the long-time Republican activist and perennial candidate — who defies definition by trumpeting a "bring back rent control, reform city government" agenda?

The gender bloc

Residents who want to vote along gender rather than party lines have a prime opportunity to support women for office this year. Davis’s campaign hits the classic liberal high notes of affordable housing and education; Decker, a product of public housing, has managed to cross the city’s traditional townie-progressive divide. The gender ticket gets even better with Simmons, a progressive lesbian who, at age 50, can still relate to Cambridge’s yuppie-parent demographic: she legally cares for her three young grandchildren, who were left fatherless when her son died last year.

The race slate

Another obvious organizing principle is race. This year, the pool of racially and ethnically diverse candidates includes Reeves, who is gay and has been the standard-bearer for the Cambridge black community for the past 12 years. Also topping the list is Simmons, who, if elected, would become the first black woman on the council since Sandra Graham served in the late 1980s. Ethridge King, an immigrant from Barbados, insists he’s not targeting "any particular race or ethnicity" in his campaign. Yet he’s got deep roots in the racially mixed Riverside area, where his family has long resided. The fourth black candidate is Robert Hall, an economist who filed papers in August and has all but disappeared since. And Helder "Sonny" Peixoto — a second-generation Brazilian who’s eagerly organizing the Spanish and Portuguese vote in East Cambridge — rounds out this ticket. Peixoto, a two-time candidate, has had it tough this election. An MBTA cop, he’s had to dodge an onslaught of bad press accusing him of everything from police brutality to a tumble with his wife’s ex-beau. He appears undaunted, however. "Any police officer who does his job well can get complaints," he says. "I will rise above the negative attacks and continue on."

SO WHAT’S going to happen on November 6? The local scuttlebutt is predictable: Davis, the senior CCA candidate, stands primed to pick up long-time supporters of the retiring Born; this may boost Davis’s standing among the remaining incumbents, all of whom are expected to maintain their seats. Meanwhile, Simmons, another CCA-backed candidate, is the most likely heir to Born’s seat. And expect the opening left by Braude to go to an incoming progressive. The odds-on favorite? Murphy.

Of course, nothing about an election is set in stone. This year, there’s extra buzz over the possibility that an incumbent could get bumped, letting a third challenger squeak in. It’s happened before. In 1999, for instance, two open seats yielded not two, but three new councilors: Jim Braude, Marjorie Decker, and David Maher. Incumbent Katherine Triantafillou, who’d seemed such a shoo-in at the time, ended up getting the boot. Similarly, in 1993, two empty seats led to the first-time elections of Triantafillou, Kathy Born, and Michael Sullivan. That time, then-councilor Edward Cyr was the one to lose his long-time seat. This occasional unpredictability stems from the city’s system of proportional representation, which allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. Explains Winters, a Harvard math lecturer who’s actually pored over the old ballots of municipal elections, "When multiple seats open up, it causes more fluidity in the system. One of the incumbents could lose out."

The obvious question is, who? Local prognosticators peg Ken Reeves, one of two senior councilors. Once a top vote-getter, Reeves has watched his tallies slip further and further each election. And this year, he must contend with the candidacy of another popular African-American, Simmons. Both draw not only from the black and gay communities, but from white progressives too. Though Reeves has a supremely loyal following among the so-called African-American Brahmin community — the long-time Baptist churchgoers — he’s done things to piss off his liberal base. Witness his vote against a condo-conversion ordinance last year, which baffled hard-core housing activists. Koocher puts it cryptically: "If an incumbent becomes too complacent or controversial, he could be vulnerable."

An even bigger unknown in this election is the electorate. Since rent control ended in 1995, Cambridge has been a city in flux. High rents have forced out long-standing residents — families, artists, seniors. In their place, younger, more affluent people have arrived. The new folks generally lack ties to Cambridge — no kids, no family roots. It’s anyone’s guess whether they’ll turn out to vote, but observers suspect not. "The new people are what I call ‘sidviles,’ " says Clifford Truesdell, the past chair of the Cambridge Democratic City Committee. "They’re the ‘Sorry, I Don’t Vote in Local Elections’ type."

In the end, one thing can be said for certain: the Cambridge City Council will look different come January 2002. At least two, and possibly three or even four, fresh-faced newcomers will assume first-time seats. Who knows? In Cambridge, as Truesdell points out, "you can’t rule out surprises. Anything is possible."

Kristen Lombardi can be reached at klombardi[a]phx.com