| Author |
 Topic  |
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
 Posted - 02/24/2012 : 1:40:29 PM
|
The Committee on Finance met on Thursday, February 16, 2012. The meeting was audio taped for the record. Members present were Alderman Sal Sachetta, presiding; Councilors Rosa DiFlorio, David Rodrigues and Cynthia Sarnie. Non members present were Aldermen Michael Marchese, Michael Mangan and Councilor Michael McLaughlin.. Members absent were Aldermen Robert Van Campen, L. Charles DiPerri, Councilors Sergio Cornelio and Richard Dell Isola. Communication received from Alderman Robert Van Campen that he would be on vacation and unable to attend. Communication also received from Councilor Richard Dell Isola that he would be unable to attend due to a work commitment. The Committee considered a Resolution offered by Alderman Michael Marchese: That in light of the recently adopted City Charter, that the City Clerk conduct a study of compensation levels of elected positions of City Councilors, Aldermen and Mayors in the surrounding communities of Malden, Medford, Revere and Somerville, to include term of office for said position. City Clerk Michael Matarazzo and Mayors Chief of Staff Melissa Murphy-Rodrigues were also present. A quorum was not present so the start of the meeting was delayed until 6:30pm upon the arrival of Councilor Sarnie. Mr. Matarazzo provided the Committee with compensation information from surrounding communities as well as communities with similar demographics to the City of Everett for the positions of City Councilor and Mayor. Alderman Marchese explained that the new City Charter required that the compensation issue be addressed by the current City Government. Alderman Marchese indicated that the Committee needed to take into consideration that the one branch City Council will have more responsibilities and need to attend more meetings than the current City Government. He remarked that the new City Council needed to be paid adequately and equivalent to City Councils in other communities such as Malden and Revere. He stated that he believed that the increased responsibilities would basically make the City Council positions full time and questioned how health insurance could be ruled out in the new charter. He closed by stating that it was time to change the compensation for the new City Council.
City Council wants to be paid $20,992 in 2014?
Councilor DiFlorio agreed with Alderman Marchese and acknowledged the increased responsibilities as well as well as the increased need to attend more meetings. She noted that the City of Revere City Council was like the new City Council for the City of Everett with the exception that Revere City Councilors do not run citywide and are provided healthcare. She suggested that built in pay adjustments be included in any new compensation package for the new City Council. Councilor Sarnie asked Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues if it was legal to exclude health insurance for City Councilors in the new City Charter since MGL requires employers to provide employees with health insurance. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues responded that an employee would need to work 20 hours a week for 16 weeks to qualify for health insurance. Alderman Marchese and Councilors DiFlorio and Sarnie all expressed support for the adoption of a compensation package similar to the City of Revere where Councilors were paid $15,232 a year with an expense account of $480 a month with health insurance being provided if possible. Councilor Rodrigues strongly disagreed and suggested that the Committee do its own study. He stated that there was no rush to get a compensation package out for the City Council or the Mayor at this time. Councilor DiFlorio asked Mr. Matarazzo if the new City Charter required a compensation package be put in place 18 months prior to the new City Council take effect. Mr. Matarazzo responded that he was unsure of the timeframe but would look into. Alderman Sachetta stated noted that based on the compensation information requested the City of Revere came in the closest to the City of Everett in demographics but he expressed concern over the process on whether we do what other cities do or do our own compensation package. He reminded the members that higher salaries would result in more people running for office. Alderman Marchese stated that this meeting was a starting point and recommended further time. Alderman Mangan noted that the Committee had a lot of homework to do on the matter. Councilor DiFlorio requested that the City Solicitor be invited to the next meeting to discuss the health care issue. Accordingly, the Committee voted: To report back to the Board of Alderman with a recommendation to request further time and to invite the City Solicitor to the next meeting. Respectfully Submitted, John W. Burley, Clerk of Committees
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2012 : 2:50:00 PM
|
Thanks for posting this massdee. I think it's interesting that they're already trying to change the charter to provide health insurance. And I love that Rosa wants "built in pay adjustments" in the new compensation package. This is the same woman who has had no problem in recent years making sure the non union employees working in city hall didn't receive pay increases. I guess it makes a difference because it may be her?
Does anyone other than Marchese & Rosa see being on the council as a full time job? The biggest difference I see is that it's not going to be as easy to miss a meeting because their absence will be more noticeable. Taking summers off might become a problem too. Some of them actually do work and pay attention to things but frankly, I think the majority are there for what they can get out of it which includes a full time city job at some point so they can suck the city pension fund dry!
Now that I think about it, how long will it take before they try to change the restriction on an elected official taking a city job? That probably won't last long if they can find a way to change it..... |
 |
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2012 : 3:19:16 PM
|
It sounds like this eleven member city council might end up costing the taxpayers even more than the twenty-five member city council.
|
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2012 : 4:21:43 PM
|
| I never figured it would be a money saver but I was hoping it would be a wash. How much is the current group costing? |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 02/24/2012 : 6:03:42 PM
|
7 X 7,200 = 50,400
18 X 5,500 = 99,000
1 X 5,000 = 5,000 (clerk of the common council)
Total = 154,400 & Health and Life Insurance
I could live with a wash (salary only) too. $480 a month in expenses just seems absurd.
Subcommittees will probably only have three members (think License). Divide up the other four main committees (Finance, R&O, Safety, Service) so that every member is only on one of them with the exception of the Council President who gets two of them. Licenses? Still meet on the same nght as the regular council meeting and just rotate each year so everyone has a turn. Bills and Accounts goes to the members with the least senority. I just don't see any of that as much more than it is today.
Where I see a shift in work is in constituent services with a shrinkage in ward representation. The answer to that? Let City Hall take care of that function, as they should. Legislators shouldn't be doing that work for the most part. Councilors will have to get involved when citizens don't feel that they are getting an adequate response from City Hall though.
I was never a fan of a total health care ban for the councilors; I actually shared the same concern as Councilor Sarnie stated at that meeting. I did want to see it limited though. If they could get it from somewhere else (their or their spouse's employer, medicare, etc.), they shouldn't have been allowed to get it thru the city. I also thought that, if they did get it, maybe they should be paying for larger share of the premium than the average city employee.
But it is what it is. I believe the new charter had to reviewed by the state agency that is in charge of charters and the attorney general's office. I guessing that they didn't find anything illegal with the health care and life insurance prohibitions or they would have made the charter commission take them out. If the state happened to miss something and they have to come out, then so be that too.
I don't see how they'll be able to repeal other parts of the charter that they may not like without a legal basis and I just don't see it. The only other way for them to change the charter is to get it on the ballot and let the voters decide. I would hope that the voters would see right thru any effort of that type. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2012 : 07:37:47 AM
|
| Anybody else see the Finance Committee Meeting last night? I still have a headache from viewing it but both items on the agenda (Water & Sewer Budget, Salary Increases for City Council & Mayor) are required viewing. |
|
|
|
kittycat
Member
66 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2012 : 10:32:26 AM
|
| Not yet Tetris but heard about the salaries. |
|
|
|
kittycat
Member
66 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2012 : 2:45:09 PM
|
#1 Finance Committee
March 28, 2012
The Committee on Finance met on Wednesday, March 28, 2012.
The meeting was audio taped for the record.
Members present were Alderman Sal Sachetta, presiding; Aldermen L. Charles DiPerri, Robert Van Campen, Councilors Rosa DiFlorio, Richard Dell Isola, David Rodrigues and Cynthia Sarnie.
Member absent was Councilor Sergio Cornelio.
The Committee considered an Order: To raise and appropriate or transfer funds from available funds a sum of money to operate the Fiscal Year 2013 Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund.
Mayor Carlo DeMaria, Mayors Chief of Staff Melissa Murphy-Rodrigues, Acting City Service
Director Peter Pietrantonio Enterprise Fund Consultant Davy Gardner were also present.
Councilor DiFlorio began the meeting by asking Mayor DeMaria if he returned this meeting
recommending any cuts that could be made to the 2013 Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund budget. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues stated that they had a solution whereas they could reduce the $500,000 water main replacement line item and fund that line items instead through a ten year Local Water System Assistance Program loan through MWRA. Councilor DiFlorio recommended using $130,000 from the Stabilization fund for vehicle replacement rather than keep that line item in the water/sewer budget. Mayor DeMaria stated that he feels that the burden for that type of purchase should be placed on the ratepayers rather than the taxpayers. Councilor Rodrigues stated that he wanted to see Water/Sewer Enterprise budget that was most reflective of the annual operation of that Department.
Mayor DeMaria noted that the $630,000 reflected for Capital Improvements was a one time event. Mr. Pietrantonio explained that he explored to see if City Vehicles could be
provided to the Water Department, but couldn’t do so. Councilor Sarnie expressed concern that any increase in water/sewer could hit ratepayers hard if it included the costs of new vehicles. She suggested using the Stabilization fund for the purchase of the new vehicles and recommended only hiring one new employee rather than two as a means to keep the rate increase down. Alderman Van Campen concurred that he didn’t want to shock raterpayers right out of the gate. He reviewed and questioned the need for several of the line items in the budget including the need for a Consultant. Mayor DeMaria explained that he needed the Consultant at this time but if he was successful in hiring a new Chief Financial Officer in the future then he would review the need for a Enterprise Consultant at that time. Mr. Gardner provided the Committee with an overview of his responsibilities.
Councilor Dell Isola questioned the types of vehicles to be purchased and Mr. Pietrantonio provided a description of what they were looking at acquiring. Councilor Sarnie questioned the proposed plans for the home meter replacement. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues explained that the line item would be in the upcoming budget and if approved they would proceed with the work. Alderman Sachetta stated that he had received some complaints about the rates going up 7%. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues noted that this was the first increase in six years. Alderman Sachetta questioned what the timeframe was for City Council approval. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues explained that the W/S budget Finance - #1 – 3/28/12 page needed to be approved by the City Council within 45 days from the receipt of the budget from the Mayor which would require that approval be received by April 14, 2012. Alderman DiPerri questioned if a Public Hearing was required. Ms. Murphy-Rodrigues responded that MGL specified the budget process for the Water/Sewer Enterprise fund which did not require a Public Hearing. Alderman Van Campen suggested that the City borrow over 10 years the $500,000 for the water main replacement.
The Committee voted favorable on the following cuts:
- reduce the Water Main Replacement line item - $400,000
- reduce the Emergency Repair line item - $50,000
- eliminate the Capital Items line item - $130,000
- reduce the Salaries line item - $40,000
The vote to cut the $35,000 Enterprise Fund Consultant line item failed.
The Committee suggested that the Mayor utilize other funding sources for the acquisition of new vehicle purchases. Mayor DeMaria reminded the Committee that the City has used approximately $2 million a year from taxpayers to subsidize the water use of large companies. He stated that he would rather use Free Cash for other infrastructure improvements. The Committee voted: To report back to the Board of Alderman with a recommendation for favorable action on the FY13 Water/Sewer Enterprise Fund Budget as submitted by the Mayor and as amended by the Committee with $620,000 in Budget reductions to the line items listed above in this report.
#2 Finance Committee
March 28, 2012
The Committee on Finance met on Wednesday, March 28, 2012.
The meeting was audio taped for the record.
Members present were Alderman Sal Sachetta, presiding; Aldermen L. Charles DiPerri, Robert Van Campen, Councilors Rosa DiFlorio, Richard Dell Isola, David Rodrigues and Cynthia Sarnie.
Member absent was Councilor Sergio Cornelio.
The Committee considered a Resolution offered by Alderman Michael Marchese: That in light of the recently adopted City Charter, that the City Clerk conduct a study of compensation levels for elected positions of City Councilors and Mayors in surrounding communities.
Alderman Michael Marchese, the Sponsor was also present. City Solicitor Colleen Mejia was
invited but was not present.
Alderman Marchese explained to the Committee that he was not sure what the work load would be nor did he know on how many meetings would be required to attend for a new City Councilor in the next municipal election under the new Charter changes which he stated would reflect what a compensation package should be for the City Council. He questioned if MGL or Health Care Reform would require that health benefits be provided to the new City Council even though the Charter states otherwise. Mr. Murphy-Rodrigues explained that she spoke with the City Solicitor on this matter and that MGL states that elected officials may receive health benefits, however the new City Charter clearly states that they not receive these benefits. Alderman Marchese remarked that maybe the monies used to pay health benefits could be moved into a compensation package instead. Councilor DiFlorio noted that she has a piece of business in the Rules & Ordinance
Committee looking for Charter clarification. She informed the Committee that she spoke with a Revere City Councilor and learned that they get paid $23,000 a year in addition they receive health benefits and expense accounts. She stated that the new City Councilors in Everett will have to attend more Committee assignments and that they will have to run a more costly City wide race compared to their counterparts in other communities that only run in ward races. She requested that the Committee come to a fair agreement on a compensation package for the new City Council and Mayor soon. Alderman Sachetta reminded the Committee that the majority of the residents voted for change and felt that if big raises were provided there would be a riot.
Mayor DeMaria
remarked that this was a serious issue that needed to be resolved soon to avoid political posturing in an election year. Alderman DiPerri felt it was important to attract quality people to the City Council and noted that the last City Council pay raise was in the early 1980’s. He remarked that the position was worth more than the salaries being provided today. Councilor Sarnie wondered how many meeting other City Governments attended in a months timeframe. Mayor DeMaria noted that if the current total salary line item of $213,000 and divided it among the 11 new members it would result in a potential salary of approximately $20,000 per member and would still save the City the $160,000 currently being spent on providing Health benefits to City Council
members.
Councilor DiFlorio stated that she believed
Finance - #2 – 3/28/12 page 2
a starting salary of $115,000 for the Mayor was fair but felt that there should be built in increases that would reflect increases the Union employees receive. Councilor Rodrigues remarked that from a personal perspective you do this job for duty not pay. He disagreed with pulling numbers out of the air. He stated that there was no rush and stated further that we shouldn’t be doing what Revere or other communities do, but should do what Everett does. Councilor Dell Isola agreed with Councilor Rodrigues that there was no rush to push through at this time. Councilor Sarnie suggested starting at $15,000 and pay for Committee assignments. Alderman Van Campen informed the Committee that he was prepared to vote on an increase but didn’t know what that number was as of yet. Alderman Sachetta and Councilor Sarnie suggested that all Committee members do some homework on the matter and come back to the next meeting with some recommendations.
Accordingly, the Committee voted: To report back to the Board of Alderman with a
recommendation to request further time and to invite the Mayor, City Solicitor and City Clerk.
Respectfully Submitted,
John W. Burley
Clerk of Committees |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2012 : 1:15:04 PM
|
I'm hearing the proposed salary for elected officials when the new charter goes into effect is 30K +
I really hope that gets shut down ASAP. It's absurd.... and not the savings that people were looking for .....that voted on the new charter for cost savings in the first place.
Be diligent with our tax dollars!
Everett City Council
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 3, 2012, 6:00 P.M. (LIVE ON ECTV-16)
Held in Council Chambers, City Hall, Third Floor
MEMBERS: Aldermen Sal Sachetta-Chairman, Chuck DiPerri, Rob Van Campen,
Councilors Sergio Cornelio-Co-Chairperson, Rosa DiFlorio, David
Rodrigues, Richard DellIsola, Cynthia Sarnie
NOTICES POSTED & EMAILED & MAILED: 4-25-12
AGENDA
1. A0031-12 Resolution/s/Alderman Michael K. Marchese-In light of the recently
adopted city charter, that the city clerk conduct a study of compensation levels for elected
positions of city councilors, aldermen and mayor in surrounding cities of Malden,
Medford, Revere and Somerville, to include term of office for said positions. Invited:
Sponsor, Mayor. City Clerk and City Solicitor
2. C0027-12 Resolution/s/Councilor Michael McLaughlin-To request that the
School Department appear to tell us how their budget is going and what they will do
different next year so they do not have to come to us for free cash transfers. No one
invited as Sponsor is requesting to refer back to Sponsor and he can bring up during
budget process.
Adjournment
Respectfully submitted,
Caroline McCorry
Administrative Assistant/Office Manager
Office of the Everett City Council
cc: Members
Facilities Maintenance to have City Hall rear door opened at 5 p.m.
ECTV to go live on Channel 16 and post on ECTV
City Clerk to place on Website. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 10:11:29 AM
|
| If they approve 30K+, those that voted for it better not plan on having the opportunity to benefit from that decision!! |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 12:53:59 PM
|
It's so absurd, and anything close to 30K each (all over because they will be attending more meetings) is really an insult to people and people that voted for the new charter for cost savings.
There are people out there that commute to work .....and/or..... ride and pay for the T everyday.... actually WORK full time........ then trek on home that do not even earn 30K.
Our parks are a disgrace. I complain all the time. They are filled with needles, condoms, the equipment is broken....and I'm always told that there's "no money"
If we do not have the money to keep our parks clean and children safe.... we should not be entertaining this type of ridiculous salary in Everett (which is only 3 miles) I say that because we are being compared to Revere.
Revere is more than 5 miles long and has a lot more people that live there than Everett. Revere also has a lot more to offer and has much more revenue coming in. They have the Beach, Wonderland, the Cinema, etc etc etc.....all that income..... and a lot more retail.
What happened to the days of becoming a politician for the best interest of the taxpayers, or because you believe in something, and just want to make a difference? All I see from our elected officials is backstabbing, juvenile comments to each other and and get what they can for themselves. This city has become an embarrassment and a disgrace. |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 1:26:28 PM
|
| I think I've said at least part of this before. Divide up the existing appropriation for the city council salaries by 11 and move on. Then go out and prove that as members of the new body, they are worth more than that. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 2:04:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by tetris
I think I've said at least part of this before. Divide up the existing appropriation for the city council salaries by 11 and move on. Then go out and prove that as members of the new body, they are worth more than that.
Perfect solution. |
|
|
|
cozulady
Senior Member
165 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 2:14:15 PM
|
| The divided solution is in the correct range (13,000). I was figuring 15-20,000 since they are losing the health insurance benefit that most cities in the Greater Boston area receive. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 3:08:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tails
quote:
Originally posted by tetris
I think I've said at least part of this before. Divide up the existing appropriation for the city council salaries by 11 and move on. Then go out and prove that as members of the new body, they are worth more than that.
Perfect solution.
I agree 100% |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2012 : 7:31:01 PM
|
It's actually slightly over $14K using the number I posted back on 2/24 above. Make it 14K for round numbers. (11 * 14K = 154K). That's almost a 50% increase over what an alderman gets now. It's more than what I'm told the charter commission was considering (10K) before they backed off and let the decision fall to the city council. And if you just watched the joint convention about the financial condition of the city and the problems that the city may face in the next five years, I don't know how they could expect any more than that right now. Maybe that's why further time was requested on the piece at tonight's finance committee meeting. Let's hope anyways.
I know that they haven't had a raise in years and it's hard to bring one up but, like I said, let the new body prove to us that they deserve more than that. And if that happens and when things hopefully get better financially, come back and revisit it again. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Finance Committee Meeting
