Cambridge council gathers priorities as city manager begins PILOT talks with Harvard

The Cambridge City Council held a public hearing to collect community and council input as City Manager Hwang begins negotiating a payments‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) agreement with Harvard University.

Resident Dan Totten urged the council to press Harvard for a ‘‘transformational’’ increase in its PILOT contribution and to tie future agreements to direct services such as universal after‑school programs. ‘‘Now it’s time for them to step up and increase their pilot contribution,’’ Totten said, and called for Harvard to commit money, space and staffing to after‑school programming for Cambridge children.

City Manager Hwang and city staff provided background on PILOTs, which they described as voluntary, negotiated commitments by tax‑exempt institutions. ‘‘We continue to have a really healthy and productive relationship with the university,’’ Hwang said, while noting that PILOT provisions are typically voluntary and may not be legally enforceable in the same way as taxes.

Why it matters: Harvard’s local presence and scale make its negotiated payment levels consequential for Cambridge’s budget and housing priorities. Staff said Harvard’s 2023 cash PILOT payment to Cambridge was about $4.3 million; the university also makes a separate roughly $4.0 million payment to Boston. City staff estimated current Cambridge PILOT receipts under the agreement at about $4.5 million annually when supplements are included.

Councilors used the hearing to press for a mix of direct dollars and program commitments. Vice Mayor McGovern framed the relationship as ‘‘kinda like a complicated marriage’’ and said Cambridge should ask for more money and partnership from Harvard, especially for housing and education. Councilor Sabrina Wheeler noted the effect of graduate‑student enrollment on the local housing market and argued that ‘‘a commitment both to funding affordable housing and to creating more housing for their students should absolutely be a part of this’’ negotiation.

Several councilors and the mayor urged the city to seek concrete, measurable commitments: increased funding for the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust, targeted scholarships or college support (including proposals tied to historically Black colleges and universities), expanded after‑school slots, and extensions of the RISE basic‑income pilot when ARPA funding ends. Mayor Simmons suggested assigning dollar figures to proposed initiatives so negotiators can weigh tradeoffs between a larger PILOT payment and programmatic investments.

Staff clarified existing university commitments and mechanisms. A city staff member explained that Harvard committed $20 million to a regional affordable‑housing loan fund split among three intermediaries; the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust received a $6,000,000 loan used on a revolving basis for local projects. The staff member said the loan is expected to be repaid and that the original interest rate when established was 2 percent, with the city negotiating extensions so funds remain available.

Legal and procedural context: Assistant City Solicitor Evan Bjorklund told the council that, under the city charter, the city manager has authority to contract and there is no statutory requirement that the City Council must approve a PILOT agreement; historically, council direction shaped affordable‑housing provisions (an amendment in 1996 was cited as precedent). Bjorklund cautioned that, because PILOT terms are voluntary, the council and staff should be mindful that not all negotiated provisions will be legally enforceable.

Next steps: City Manager Hwang said staff will organize the council’s priorities and begin taking them to the university, and that some topics are better sequenced into separate town‑gown conversations. ‘‘We will be organizing this, taking this to the university and start feeling out’’ those negotiations, he said. No formal change to the current PILOT was adopted at the hearing.

The hearing concluded with routine business: Councilor Wilson moved to adjourn and the council approved the motion by roll call (five yes votes).