| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 9:22:28 PM
|
So much for my good source, now I am hearing a Tom Mills will be getting the position. I guess we will just have to wait until the meeting, unless someone actually has some reliable info.
Billy Cardello's Facebook page is saying Congrats to Tom Mills. |
Edited by - massdee on 01/12/2012 9:37:30 PM |
 |
|
|
cozulady
Senior Member
165 Posts |
 Posted - 01/12/2012 : 11:50:13 PM
|
| What Bill did is a disgrace. He knew he would not be serving his term. He may have been here a for up to 6 months, but he was waiting for his Everett house to sell. He already had purchased his Peabody home. He took the right to choose from the people of his ward (5) and initially told Dragone he would recommend him for the job. Then he turned and announced Mills, never telling Dragone he had changed his support. Good riddance to him. It is because of behavior like his that people wanted to rid the city of the CC. It will be interesting who will give the support to Dragone who originally had the support. Mills will most likely win and I only hope that he isn't another "good old boy" and a person who will give Carlo what he wants. We can only hope. |
|
|
|
charm
Senior Member
264 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2012 : 08:56:21 AM
|
Billy Cardello- Tom Mills
CONGRATS DO NOT LET THEM CONTROL YOU YOU HAVE TO BE YOURSELF TOM YOU DO FINE IF YOU NEED HELP ON SOME ISSUE PLEASE CALL ME I'LL HELP YOU
I really hope this guys does not make it. All the muskateers will be voting for a jerk. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2012 : 09:47:40 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by cozulady
What Bill did is a disgrace. He knew he would not be serving his term. He may have been here a for up to 6 months, but he was waiting for his Everett house to sell. He already had purchased his Peabody home. He took the right to choose from the people of his ward (5) and initially told Dragone he would recommend him for the job. Then he turned and announced Mills, never telling Dragone he had changed his support. Good riddance to him. It is because of behavior like his that people wanted to rid the city of the CC. It will be interesting who will give the support to Dragone who originally had the support. Mills will most likely win and I only hope that he isn't another "good old boy" and a person who will give Carlo what he wants. We can only hope.
No matter how Billy spins it, I still say it was voter fraud and should be looked into on a state level. He had no intention of fulfilling his term when he asked people for their votes and was not living in Everett and that can be proven. Anyone that HE recommends should not be considered. Nothing against that person, Billy should have stayed out of it after what he did. Shame on him and the common council that votes for Tom Mills………..and you are absolutely right Cozulady…...that is exactly why the voters wanted to get rid of the CC no matter the cost. It’s rather obvious that it will be Billy pulling his strings too. |
|
|
|
cozulady
Senior Member
165 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2012 : 3:00:29 PM
|
| Unfortunately the councullors that don't vote for Mills will probably get harassed and find it difficult to accomplish much. They need to go with their conscience regardless of the pressure they get. The Ward 5 members are on board because Cardello wants Mills. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2012 : 6:50:06 PM
|
I don't know Mills or Dragone personally, so I don't have a dog in this fight. The entire situation leaves a dirty taste in your mouth. Billy Cardello is no longer on the council and no longer lives in Everett. He should have NO input on who does or does not get this vacant seat. Cardello chose to leave Everett and the seat, end of story for his involvement in Everett's politics.
I think he compromised the ward 5 common council election. It appears to me, this was done intentionally to get his "guy" in the seat. My problem is with Cardello not with the people running for the seat. He should keep his nose out of it and let the councilors elect who they think is best for the job.
Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2012 : 9:02:13 PM
|
I have no idea if Billy Cardello was planning on serving or not. His facebook page seemed to indicate that he was offering the spot around as early as last summer; but he also continued to hold the seat for the better part of a month after papers passed on his Peabody property. It also seemed to be more than a coincidence that he only stepped down after it was reported that there was easily obtainable, absolute proof that he was no longer a resident of the city. Cornelio seemed truly shocked when he announced that he had accepted the resignation (and I don't think that he's that good of an actor).
I agree that the election for the seat was compromised and it never should have happened. I believe that Cardello never should have run if he was even considering moving. However, there's not a lot that can be done about it now. But to let Cardello have any say in who gets the seat is beyond ridiculous and is a further slap in the face to the voters of Ward 5. Any councilor that votes for a Cardello backed candidate needs to think twice before they cast their vote to ensure that they are putting a highly qualified person in the seat. A poor choice, especially in this situation, will only reflect badly on them, not on Cardello. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2012 : 8:19:21 PM
|
| Anyone hear a rumor about a Hanlon running for the City Council in 2013? |
|
|
|
Baby Huey
Member
95 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2012 : 10:09:44 PM
|
| I actually recently heard that as well. I heard it may be at-large, or depending on who runs in ward 6. Ward 6 could be a very interesting seat if Sachetta decides to retire, which he has indicated as a possibility. McGonagle may run for it, as well as McLaughlin and possibly Hicks. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2012 : 10:13:05 PM
|
| I heard he was going to challenge Stat Smith............... |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2012 : 12:45:20 PM
|
| I heard that about John a while back too but more recently I was told "a" Hanlon is thinking about running for the city council. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2012 : 08:16:49 AM
|
| Personally, I think it's time for John to hang it up. Nice man, great city clerk, lousy mayor. |
|
|
|
Linda M
Member
43 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2012 : 05:34:47 AM
|
I heard that Adam Ragucci is a new hire for the City of Everett 911, isn't this the same person who a couple of years ago police wanted to arrest for showing up at police scenes ? Maybe they should go back and listen to the tapes of the veteran officers running his plate at every call he was there.
And where is the money coming from? who did they let go? I hope there are questions ask (but we all know they won't, Puelo will be the new CC from ward 4, should go to Lenny LoRusso but it won't) stack the CC for the mayors votes.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2012 : 11:16:31 AM
|
| If the new Charter is in effect as of the election, the seat should go to LoRusso. Isn't there also something in the new Charter about a waiting period between leaving an elected position and becoming a city employee? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2012 : 12:06:39 PM
|
The new charter doesn't allow an elected official to take a city position until they are out of office for a year. The Mayor pretty much said on Monday night that he doesn't feel that at least that particular provision of the new charter in is effect though.
I would guess that a waiver of state ethics rules was also obtained because, as we have discussed before, state ethics law does not allow an elected official to resign to take a city position unless they wait six months before they take the position. I'm not sure what the reason for that rule is though as it seems that the State Ethics Commission always grants this waiver, at least in Everett's case.
I've previously stated that I believe that the new charter is in effect. But if there is one section of it that can't be fully in place at this time it is the section on the City Council. However, I think that a case can be made though that since the Charter Commission named the the new legislative body the City Council and that the city's current legislative body is also named the City Council, there is really nothing that prevents the new rules from being applied to the old body to whatever extente possible even though the composition of the body is not the same as what is described in the new charter. What good reasons are there to ignore the new rules on employment restrictions and filling vacancies for City Council members? I believe that to ignore these provisions is akin to ignoring the will of the voters that approved the new charter. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
More Rumors
