Harvard and Cambridge Must Stand Together

Harvard and Cambridge are inextricably connected — and as the two work together, neither must be the weaker link.

As both a proud Harvard alumna and a Cambridge city councilor, I’ve seen what that relationship looks like in practice — a shared goal of creating a livable and livelier city. With our urban spaces evolving to meet modern economic and environmental realities, Harvard and the Cambridge community should support mutually beneficial initiatives for the betterment of both town and gown.

One place to start is Harvard Square. Conversations about the Square often assume a false choice between access and vitality, as if making streets more comfortable for people makes them less functional.

The recent pedestrianization of Lower Bow Street is a promising step toward a Square where public space is designed for broader public life — not just for moving cars through as quickly as possible. The Harvard community should vocalize their support for this change and make full use of the space to ensure it lasts.

That same spirit should extend to the heart of the Square. I’ve proposed the first block of Brattle as a great candidate for pedestrianization. A car-free block there would create room for outdoor seating, community events, safer crossings, and a more coherent sense of place in the Square’s core. Harvard students, staff, and visitors already animate this area every day; redesigning it around human activity would simply recognize how the space is actually used.

A more animated public life also requires rethinking some outdated state rules. The decision — enabled by a new state law and adopted by the city — to allow open container zones during the World Cup and America’s 250th celebrations reflects a welcome recognition that cities can host joyful, well-managed public gatherings.

Massachusetts’ arcane alcohol laws, which treat the public conviviality of responsible adults as inherently suspect, are desperately in need of review. If open container areas can work for a major international event, they can work more broadly under clear local rules and thoughtful enforcement.

This policy should not be a one-time exception; it should open the door to permanent reform of the alcohol regulations making street life inflexible and unwelcoming. A Harvard Square that doesn’t punish students for enjoying their college experience is one that will in turn enjoy those students’ increased economic support. For a more vibrant university experience and community, join the city in advocating for these changes to be permanent.

Cambridge is also experiencing a culture shift around how we move. Residents increasingly travel by foot, bike, scooter, bus, and train — all modes of transport making Cambridge cleaner, healthier, and less congested.

Yet the steady transition to friendlier modes of transit has caused concerns from car-dependent residents amid accidents. While calls for improved street safety infrastructure are legitimate, the promise of micromobility depends equally on safe riding practices. That means not riding on crowded sidewalks, yielding to pedestrians, obeying traffic signals, using lights at night, and recognizing that convenience does not cancel obligation.

If micromobility is to keep expanding — and it should — public support will depend on whether use is responsible. Harvard students can help build that support through responsible riding, which strengthens the case for more protected bike lanes, better scooter policy, safer intersections, and overall reduced car dependence.

As much as Harvard affiliates should seek to engage in city initiatives, the University equally deserves the support of the broader Cambridge community.

Facing a hostile federal administration, Harvard is weathering funding cuts and pursuing lawsuits to protect students, preserve access to education, and defend the rule of law. Despite legitimate concerns and points of debate, the University deserves credit for standing up for these shared values.

But Harvard can’t do it alone. I encourage all alumni to join Crimson Courage, a group dedicated to advocating for academic freedom and autonomy. Regardless of affiliation, city residents should also explore a great resource — Stand for Campus Freedom, a movement mobilizing to uphold the ideals of higher education and reject political interference in universities.

Amid myriad noble causes, it might seem easiest for each side to simply stay in their own lane. Cambridge residents may be wont to let Harvard administrative decisions stay behind the brick arches, students more apt to focus on national politics than rally for local legislation. But for both Cambridge and Harvard to thrive, each needs the other.

Town-gown relations can be tricky. There are real tensions around land use, taxes, institutional expansion, policing, protests, and the pace and direction of change. While those disagreements should not be minimized, respectful deliberations can lead to mutually beneficial outcomes. The city gains from the University’s economic engine, cultural life, talent, and global reputation. The University gains from its integration in a dynamic, educated, civically engaged city.

Harvard should continue showing up as a partner in making Cambridge more livable and lively, and the broader Cambridge community should welcome that engagement and in return support the University’s fight for academic freedom. A great university and a great city do not merely coexist; they push each other to be better.

Patricia “Patty” M. Nolan ’80 is a Cambridge city councilor and a former member of the Cambridge School Committee.