Williamson Embraces 'Alternative' Politics

Sporting a scruffy, graying beard and a short ponytail, Cambridge City Council candidate James M. Williamson does not have the clean-cut look of a typical politician—something he takes pride in.

“I see myself as a serious candidate, but I don’t see myself as a professional politician,” Williamson says. “While my objective is to get number one votes, my chief objective is not to get elected at all costs.”

Describing himself instead as a “citizen candidate,” Williamson says that while he hopes to get votes in next Tuesday’s election, he has no illusions about being elected.

He is not going door to door campaigning or seeking endorsements, and he is not doing any fundraising for his candidacy.

Instead, he says he is running to build on his last campaign two years ago, staying with the political priniciples that have kept him involved in Cambridge for more than 30 years.

“I want to help foster alternative politics and alternative solutions to problems we face in society,” Williamson says. “I’ve always been involved, one way or the other, in what people call civic engagement.”

Williamson says he has always served as a public interest advocate, even if it means not having a steady income. He is currently working to help organize a Ralph Nader rally to be held Nov. 10 in Boston.

“The things that most interest me I’m, unfortunately, not always getting paid for,” Williamson says.

Criticizing The Council

While Wiliamson does not expect to be elected, he still holds strong opinionsabout the council and how the city operates, saying the main issue facing the city is the loss of citizen control of the government.

Williamson says the council often simply pays “lip service” to the public, putting forth “reams of documents every week purporting public involvement” in the council’s actions, and then using the majority of council time to “go on for hours saying nothing, grandstanding or pontificating.”

He says the council does not listen to residents during the public comment period of each week’s meeting, which he no longer attends because he says they left him feeling “empty and angry.”

“They’re not listening, they’re talking to each other, they’re in the backroom eating,” Williamson said. “It’s a farcical exercise.”

Williamson also criticizes the council as overpaid and undeserving of the 22 percent pay raise they voted for themselves last year.

“It’s as if it’s a private club that’s having a private party at our expense, and we’re not invited,” Williamson says.

He even goes as far as to say the council is no longer an effectively working body.

“The City Council does not have real power in this community,” Williamson says. “There are other locations where decisions are being made, and it’s not there.”

Pushing For Change

But while Williamson bashes the current councillors, saying none of the incumbents deserve to be reelected, he still believes some positive change can be made through the council.

Williamson says the city manager—who handles the daily operations of the city—currently has too much power, but that the balance could easily be changed by giving councillors the power to make and approve appointments to citywide boards.

“This imbalance of power needs to be changed in the city,” says Williamson, who says he believes giving the council more control would “enhance the accountablility of the process” since councillors are directly elected and the city manager is not.

“Citizen power and real democracy are what’s important to me,” Williamson says. “People are more satisfied if they are really participating.”

Williamson says there should be elected neighborhood community boards that cover all aspects of city life, from development and zoning to budgetary matters.

“Where and when does the city spend its money in the city?” Williamson asks. “Why shouldn’t neighborhoods be deciding that?”

And like almost all Cambridge political hopefuls, Williamson says that Harvard and MIT have a greater responsibility to their surroundings regarding overdevelopment and tax payments.

Williamson calls Harvard and MIT “giant corpororate tax shelters” that should either pay higher payment in lieu of taxes or face losing their tax exempt status.

“They were given it, and it can be taken away,” Williamson says of the University’s tax-exempt status. “Who’s afraid of the big, bad wolf?”

Regarding overdevelopment, William-son says Harvard should consider following a “land for peace” plan to give land back to Cambridge neighborhoods in areas where residents are adamantly opposed to further development.

“Harvard is endlessly expanding,” Williamson says. “When does it stop?”

But overdevelopment is not just a Harvard-related problem, says William-son, who decries the sprawling buildings and retail outlets that have taken over the city.

He cites the “death of Harvard Square” as the most visible example, saying the area has turned into “one giant, sterile, outdoor corporate mall” overrun by cell phone stores.

In his election effort two years ago— in which he placed 17th out of 24 candidates—Williamson said the replacement of the classic Harvard Square diner The Tasty by an Abercrombie & Fitch chain was emblematic of the problems facing Cambridge.

“You can’t find a decent coffeehouse or a place to get an affordable meal anymore,” Williamson says.

But while Williamson remains passionate about the issues central to his campaign, he also knows that he stands little chance of being elected.

He even goes so far as to endorse other candidates, saying challengers John Pitkin and E. Denise Simmons deserve to be elected, since they best represent the ideas he also supports.

“It’s not about just voting for me,” Williamson says. “It’s about intelligent support for the kind of politics you want to see in your city.”

—Staff writer Imtiyaz H. Delawala can be reached at delawala@fas.harvard.edu.