News
In Fight Against Trump, Harvard Goes From Media Lockdown to the Limelight
News
The Changing Meaning and Lasting Power of the Harvard Name
News
Can Harvard Bring Students’ Focus Back to the Classroom?
News
Harvard Activists Have a New Reason To Protest. Does Palestine Fit In?
News
Strings Attached: How Harvard’s Wealthiest Alumni Are Reshaping University Giving
After a deal between a major life science developer and a Cambridge nonprofit sparked a citywide dispute over transparency, with more than $21 million on the table, the Cambridge City Council approved a compromise to redistribute the funds.
The debate began when BioMed, one of the largest life science developers in the country, set their sights on a new office and laboratory space in Cambridge last October. In exchange for the ability to exceed existing height and space restrictions in the new development, BioMed was required to agree with the city’s request for millions of dollars in community benefits.
Initially, BioMed pitched a single contribution to the East End House — offering $21.2 million to one of Cambridge’s oldest nonprofits serving low-income residents, which was at risk of closing without the funds to secure a permanent facility. BioMed has a longstanding partnership with East End House, with members serving on the nonprofit’s board for nearly two decades.
But a group of Cambridge nonprofit leaders raised red flags in June, criticizing the deal for a lack of transparency. In a letter to the Council, leaders of the Cambridge Community Center, Community Art Center, Economic Opportunity Committee, and Cambridge Dance Complex argued that the deal was inequitable.
The leaders wrote that many nonprofits did not pursue direct relationships with developers, instead turning to the city’s Community Benefits Fund for funding — which they believed would be a “fair and inclusive vehicle for resource allocation.”
A contribution to the Community Benefits Fund was not in BioMed’s initial proposal. But the Cambridge Nonprofit Coalition — which represents roughly a hundred Cambridge-based nonprofits — urged the Council to reallocate part of the offered funds.
After five weeks of negotiations, an amended proposal came before the Council Monday night that would give $16.8 million to the East End House and roughly $3 million to the Community Benefits Fund, which allows any nonprofit to apply for funding.
“The $3.2M allocated to the Community Benefits Fund through the BMR deal is certainly not enough to attend to all those challenges, however it will be a helpful resource to local nonprofits as they navigate through these difficult and uncertain times,” CNC Executive Director Elena Sokolow-Kaufman wrote in a statement.
But support for the allocation to the Community Benefits Fund was not unanimous. Councilor Paul F. Toner, who supported the initial $21 million allocation to the East End House, was the only councilor opposed to the amended proposal Monday night.
“This is no disrespect to the other nonprofits in the city, but I didn’t hear one complaint about this proposal from any of us until the week before we were going to vote on it,” Toner said, attributing his vote to a desire to dedicate the funding from BioMed specifically to East Cambridge.
“I live in North Cambridge. I wouldn’t think for one second that the people in North Cambridge should get any of the impact mitigation money based on what’s going to happen in East Cambridge,” he added.
The Cambridge Community Center, Community Art Center, Economic Opportunity Committee, and Cambridge Dance Complex will all also receive roughly $500,000 in the amended deal.
“We reject Councilor Toner’s assertion that our concerns amount to disparagement. On the contrary, we have worked diligently to ask important questions and to challenge flawed processes and practices,” leaders of the four nonprofits wrote in a joint statement.
“This is not about envy; it is about equity. The majority of nonprofits, even if they are not located
in East Cambridge, serve a large population of East Cambridge residents of all ages,” they wrote.
All eight other Council members voted to approve the amended proposal, giving BioMed an August 18 deadline to formally agree to the funding allocations.
—Staff writer Laurel M. Shugart can be reached at laurel.shugart@thecrimson.com. Follow them on X @laurelmshugart.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.