| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 10/31/2009 : 10:56:34 PM
|
Here is the list I have came up with:
Stephen Bruce
Patricia Foley
Dorothy Martin Long
Frances Ryan
Robert Sansone
Lisa Tufts
That is it. 6 out of 9.
"Deb" |
 |
|
|
whynot
Member
47 Posts |
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 07:25:47 AM
|
SAUGUS
Charter issue has town at crossroad
Vote could alter governing makeup
By Kathy McCabe, Globe Staff | November 1, 2009
Saugus voters on Tuesday will decide if they want a new form of town government when they vote on a charter proposal that would replace the current 50-member elected Town Meeting with a 27-member Town Assembly.
The change has been hotly debated, with opponents arguing Saugus would turn into a city because the Town Assembly would be able to schedule its own meetings, like a city council. “If a legislative body can call itself into session, that is a city,’’ said John Vasapolli, the town attorney. “If they can’t call themselves into session, such as a town meeting, which has to be scheduled by a warrant or by the Board of Selectmen, that is a town form of government.’’
Charter supporters counter that the difference is minor. It still would be known as the town of Saugus, and a town manager still would be appointed by the selectmen. “We agree the assembly could call itself into session,’’ said Peter Manoogian, chairman of the Charter Commission, which was elected two years ago to review the current charter. “But Saugus would still be a town. On many levels, this brings Saugus into line with the majority of towns in Massachusetts.’’
The two sides have launched vigorous “Vote No’’ and “Vote Yes’’ campaigns. They’ve mailed out glossy fliers, stood in the town center with their respective signs, and debated in public forums.
“This is a very serious vote,’’ said Marilyn Carlson, chairwoman of the Saugus Committee to Preserve Our Town, which is pushing for a no vote. “It can forever change the town of Saugus.’’
Jill Silvester, chairwoman of Saugus Citizens for a Better Charter, said the current 62-year-old charter is outdated. “Things move at a faster pace today than they did 60 years ago,’’ she said. “There is a group of us who truly believe this needs to be done.’’
The ballot question asks voters to vote either “yes’’ or “no’’ on the entire charter; they cannot vote only for sections. A summary of the proposal is listed on the ballot. The polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
The proposed new charter contains changes in political, financial, and ethical rules. For example, town employees would not be able to run for public office unless they take a leave of absence.
Currently, town employees may run to be a town meeting member. Charter supporters say that creates a conflict of interest, since town meeting approves the town budget.
“It’s a very common practice to prohibit town employees from running for public office,’’ Manoogian said. “It’s a common feature in other charters across the country.’’
The new charter would replace the Board of Selectmen with a Select Board, five members elected to staggered terms every April. Currently, all five selectmen are elected every two years in November. A licensing board would be created to vote on liquor, entertainment, and restaurant licenses. That duty now falls to the selectmen.
The duties of the town manager also would be changed. The manager’s authority to appoint members of town boards would shift to the Select Board. The manager also would have to live in town, unless permission to live outside Saugus is granted. The manager also would be required to give regular financial updates to the Select Board, and undergo a yearly evaluation.
Saugus Town Manager Andrew Bisignani has not taken a position on the proposed charter change. “My job is to serve the people of Saugus,’’ Bisignani said during an interview in his Town Hall office. “Whatever the people decide, I will do my best to follow their mandate.’’
But Bisignani said he is concerned that the new charter could be costly. A new position for a town auditor would be created. Saugus now has a town accountant. Annual town elections will be held each April.
“Generally speaking, I have never seen a new government plan of action, or program, that did not cost money,’’ Bisignani said. “We have a town accountant now who does the job of an auditor.’’
The Town Assembly would be the biggest change. It would include two representatives from each of the town’s 10 precincts elected for two-year terms. Six members, plus the chairman, would be elected at-large for three-year terms. Currently, town meeting is made up of five members elected for two-year terms from each of the 10 precincts. Instead of having bylaws adopted at a town meeting and ultimately approved by the attorney general, the Town Assembly would create ordinances, like local laws that govern cities.
But, unlike a city mayor, the town manager would not have the authority to approve - or veto - an ordinance. Ordinances passed by the assembly would take effect immediately. “The voters can override their action by voting them out of office in the next election,’’ Silvester said. “Every five years the charter can be reviewed. Things can be changed.’’
Opponents cite the absence of a veto procedure as one reason the proposed charter is not a good fit for Saugus. “There has to be some balance,’’ said Carlson, a retired school teacher. “I think some people are probably looking for change. But change for the sake of change is not always good.’’
Kathy McCabe can be reached at kmccabe@globe.com.
© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
|
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
 Posted - 11/04/2009 : 05:28:37 AM
|
What can I say? I'm very disappointed in the selection but obviously, I think differently than the majority.
I hope they can get the job done............... |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 09:29:25 AM
|
I was very satisfied to see that Charter Review passed by such a wide margin but I'm also baffled by some of the choice that were made for Commission members. Unfortunately, at least in some cases, it looks like it became the popularity contest/name recognition exercise that I was afraid it would be.
For those of you familiar with my previous posts here, you've probably already assumed that I'll go after John Hanlon right now. I won't. Although I didn't vote for him, I do believe that he has the experience to be an asset to the committee; since he won a seat though, I'll reserve judgment until I see how he uses that expertise. But the choices that get me the most are the following.
Michael Bono. Never did a video for ECTV or run a message on ECTV's message boards. He never had a campaign announcement in any of the newspapers. How does anyone know what he's all about? How does work in a city wide campaign? In the same vein, Bennie Schiavo runs a close second in this vein with only a last minute newspaper announcement that didn’t really say much. I just don’t get it.
Jason Marcus. OK, I get that the Ward 2 political talent pool is so thin that he tops the ward's Common Council ballot with a whopping 450 votes even though he's got a cloud hanging over his head. But Charter Review? He's never shown much of grasp of legislative matters in all of his time on the Common Council or the Board of Aldermen. His video for the Charter Review seat showed that he has no grasp of what is in the charter versus the ordinances. Just a poor choice in my eyes.
Paul Schlosberg. Did anyone else see his interview on ECTV last night? What else needs to be changed besides the form of the City Council? I thought that the host of the show was going to have a heart attack when Schlosberg said that. If push came to shove today, I would be in favor of eliminating of eliminating the Common Council. But the whole charter needs to be looked at, not just one issue. Given Schlosberg’s past track record, I see nothing but a bumpy ride ahead.
That said, I think that those of us that are interested in this issue need to plan to get involved in the process to whatever extent we can. There will be public hearings where we have to go and express what we want to see come out of this process. If we don’t, shame on us and we deserve what we get. |
|
|
|
Paul
Senior Member
158 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 10:42:56 AM
|
Good point Tetris,there is much more to look at than just the bicameral form of government.
I do believe that in the end we will be better off because of the charter review. |
|
|
|
Cruller DaVille
Senior Member
148 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 6:09:09 PM
|
Nice to see we agree Tets!!! Changing the form of government indeed may be the single most popular thing to do; however, it is far from the only item on the Charter Review/Reform list.
I have posted several times about my own personal concerns about the composition of this Commission. Personally, I don't believe that this is the place for novices or people with no governmental experience. If that is the case, the Commission is going to require experts in a variety of areas to assure appropriate changes are properly and legally accomplished. Guidance, if you will.
I couldn't agree with you more on your comments on those individuals you highlighted. Whoabetide us if these individuals prior public shananagans are representative of what we have to look forward to.
I'm also a bit concerned that some of the choices will play themselves out like a political three ring circus and that the personalities may become so intrusive that not much will get reformed.
I sincerely hope that these individuals have the ability to look beyond their own personal quirks and work as a single cohesive unit. Should they be incapable of doing so, I'm afraid that the ghost of Elder Joe Curnane will be resurrecting Sumner Whittier to once again admonish our efforts at change.
That being said, I wonder when they'll be launching?
Just MY Humble Opinion.......
"Cruller DaHville"
 |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 6:30:01 PM
|
Good assessment Tetris.
As I stated before, I'm concerned John Hanlon will not do well as part of the commission. He has so much information that is needed but if you've ever spent any time with him, and I have, he likes to tell stories and it can be VERY difficult to keep him on track. I hope there are enough strong personalities there that can keep him focused and get at all that knowledge.
I had a conversation with Schlossberg a couple of weeks ago & he insisted the only change that needed to be made was getting rid of the common council and he said that was all he was going to vote for as part of the commission. No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't get him to stop talking, or listen to anything I had to say relative to other, necessary changes. Since I think he's a fool, it NEVER occurred to me that other people actually take him seriously. Boy was I wrong............
I'll be at the meetings they hold! |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 6:52:39 PM
|
I will also do my best to attend those meetings. I think Dottie Martin-Long should be able to keep that commission moving forward and on track. I also agree that Mr Hanlon could be an asset if they can manage to keep him focused. Mr Sansone should be good, too. The others I'm not so crazy about.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Cruller DaVille
Senior Member
148 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 7:28:49 PM
|
I have a lot of unanswered questions relative to the Commission. For example, when do they begin? Do they need to wait till all newly elected officials begin in January? I would expect that they have to produce some sort of document that will require a vote from both the BOA and the CC and won't there be some sort of a requirement to come before the voters as well?
Do they vote a Chairperson among themselves or is it decided by the number of votes cast? A lot of questions and answers? Anyone know?
"Cruller DaHville"
|
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 7:52:56 PM
|
| Early on in the election process Councilor Napolitano produced some documentation that outlined the various steps in the charter review process. If I can get my hands on a copy I will post the relevant pieces. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 8:08:26 PM
|
Maybe Councilor Napolitano will read this thread and post it. That would be very helpful.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 10:27:12 PM
|
| I would assume the commission would have to be sworn in like the new members on the city council then elect a chairperson. That makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 10:48:41 PM
|
I have one link which sheds a little light on the subject. It tends to focus more on what it takes to get to the point that we are at now and what happens after a new charter has been proposed. But there's a little bit on required milestones in the actual process though. One interesting bit is that a public hearing on the issue needs to be held within 45 days of the election. So, the real beginning of the process is not really that far off, by early December if I had to hazard a guess.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 11/05/2009 : 07:37:20 AM
|
Cruller, I don't believe whatever the Charter Commission comes up with needs to be approved by the council or alderman. It's my understanding that it will go directly to the voters 2 years from now (2011). If their recommendations are accepted, they'll go into affect 2 years later (2013). If it's rejected, the city is back to square one and members of the Charter Commission will watch 2 years worth of work go down the drain.
That's why it's so important for people to participate in the meetings and for the Charter Commission members to listen to what the general population wants. (This is why I think Schlossberg was a poor choice. He doesn't know how to listen!) I’m hoping that as a whole, the group can be objective and are able to put their personal opinions aside and work toward making the changes the people of this city want and need.
|
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2009 : 3:22:55 PM
|
I heard the Charter Review Board was having their first meeting on Monday, November 16, 2009 at city hall. It’s open to the public.
I heard this by word of mouth so I hope the commission considers a website or the City of Everett’s website should have this information.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Charter Review
