Tenants were informed that their leases would not be extended, and that they shouldn't expect to move back into the renovated building. A $5000 "relocation payment" would go to those whogot out early.

Most of the building's inhabotants are Harvard affiliates. Around a quarter, thoug, are long-term tenants who are not Harvard affiliates.

One of these is Mike Turk, who helped to found the Harvard tenants Union back in 1977 and has been a tenant advocate ever since.

Turk tok his neighbors' concerns to the Cambridge City Council, which passed an Order on May 24 requesting that City Manager Robert Healy produce a report on the building and provide the Council with copies of a housing agreement which Harvard made with the City in 1996.

Since then, Turk and Harvard Real Estate have exchanges some more letters.

On June 21, Turk wrote asking that Harvard meet with the tenants. The Real Estate Office replied, "we do not feel it necessary to have a meeting."

Their next communication went to all the tenants, and held out a vague hope that they might after all return to their rehabbed apartments, "if available."

Turk chews over that phrase. Will the building continue to be residential at all? "The University wither does no tknow what it plans to do, or is extremely reluctant to share its plans...."

The Cit Manager has apparently not yet located a copy of the 1996 agreement.

In 1996, the University agreed to sell 100 of its formerly rent-controled units to the City for $3,100,000. The City had, in return, to "recognize the University's right touse its remaining units to house its affiliates and agree not to impede such ude."

The City also allowed the zone given over to "institutional use" to be expanded.

This deal came after 18 months of negotiation between Harvard and the City. It was hailed lustily by many tenant leaders at the time.

But not by John Pitkin who, as president of the Mid-Cambridge Neighborhood association, participated in the parallel negotiations of the Joint Committee for Neighborhood-Harvard Consultation.

"This plan would empty out almost every single permanent inhabitant from the area between Ware, JFK and Bow Street," he warned.

Pitkin got the city council to pass a mild resolution to the effect that the 1996 agreement should not per-empt further discussions with the neighbrhood.

Harvard reacted with ingignation. The deal was off, then!

This tactic produced an open and acrimonious division among tenant and neighborhood advocates. The city council hastily withdrew its resolution, with only Ken Reeves dissenting.

Harvard graciously accepted the City's surrender.

Mike Turk thinks that ther may still be some useful conditions attached to the terms of surrender. That's why he wants the city manager to come up with a certified copy of that 1996 agreement.