| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
 Posted - 11/19/2008 : 11:40:52 AM
|
The DEP told me that is one part of their PI. The heights are too large and he has too many piles. Three currently that are uncovered. They went to court over that, and the judge felt is was best served as a trial. I agree....the man needs to go to trial.
Allowing him to lower the piles, taking the waste to lower Broadway means.....no trial for Wood Waste. He is untrustworthy and I asked the DEP what happens when he is non-compliant on another site. They told me they will fine him. I laughed, and said that is the biggest joke. Those fines, hefty or not, mean NOTHING to him. He has that kind of money and he's shoving it right up the cites/residents rear.
My problem is it's not for the reasons that were stated at the podium on TV. That was an out right lie. The issues are too complex and need to be straightened out in trial.
If he, and his lawyer, had kept their word, this discussion would not even be going on. He's the one to blame for all this, not the people that are trying to do the right thing and help the residents of the city. That's not Simonelli's ward, but he's getting calls from ward one people, and he is doing this for the city that we all live in. At least he is trying. What does that tell you??
|
 |
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2008 : 11:58:03 AM
|
I forgot, the DEP told me they hold the license but the Board of Health has full authority.
Concerning that, financially for the city, that may not be the route. Someone has to do something, and the Board of Health is not putting the pressure on him. I'm sorry....they are not. They are NOT monitoring his daily activities and what it is he is accepting. The place STINKS and there are other homes and businesses being effected by this. For it to stink so bad, he's accepting SOMETHING he is not supposed to. Whether it's gypsum or blueboard....I don't know. The DEP has some idea but they did all they can. They are the state and the city needs to something too.
There was not enough pressure on the guy to keep his word. They let them stand there in June and make all kinds of promises and never held his feet to the fire. But anyone that speaks out against this, has to go up against all these high priced lawyers that that went to school to twist words around and think they are smarter than everyone else.
The Mayor is too personally involved. He is a campaign supporter to him, he held an entire function at the Wharf. The mans lawyer is his good buddy that they grew up together and he calls Attorney Nylen "Chip"
City government is bending over backwards to help him, and what they should be bending over backwards for is the resident's health and welfare instead of crying over how much money it will cost to fight this man. I say fight and send him the bill. |
|
|
|
kimmy
Member
32 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2008 : 12:35:41 PM
|
| Your allowed to put a stipulation in that if court is nessesary. that all court fees will be paid by the business that is not abiding by the terms. Has anyone sought that idea? Fines are one price but court is another. No one wants to go to court. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/27/2008 : 7:28:12 PM
|
AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA
________________________________________
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMON COUNCIL, MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2008, 7:00 PM, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 3RD FL., 484 BROADWAY, EVERETT, MASSACHUSETTS 02149
COMMUNICATIONS FROM HIS HONOR THE MAYOR
1. C0241-08 Order/s/Councilor Lorrie Bruno, as President
That $12,400.00 be transferred from the Budget Department Salaries Account (which has a surplus due to management reorganization) to the City Solicitor's Account for Litigation/Professional Services which is currently running at a deficit.
2. C0242-08 Order/s/Councilor Lorrie Bruno, as President
That $8,000.00 be transferred from the Treasurer's Department Interest on Temporary Loans Account to the City Solicitor's Department Litigation/Professional Services Account to provide funding for the city for litigation related costs.
3. C0243-08 Order/s/Councilor Lorrie Bruno, as President
That $14,600.00 be transferred from the Budget Office Salaries Account to the City Solicitor's Salaries Account to fund salary levels for that office.
PAPERS FROM THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN
4. A0185-08 Ordinance/s/Alderman Jason Marcus
That Ordinance #26 of 1965, "An ordinance for no parking on the west side of Hall Ave" is hereby repealed; with favorable traffic commission report. (Enrolled sent down for enrollment)
5. A0186-08 Ordinance/s/Alderman Jason Marcus
That Ordinance #46 of 1969, "An ordinance for no parking on the southeast side of Hall Ave" is hereby repealed; with favorable traffic commission report. (Enrolled sent down for enrollment.)
6. A0293-08
Response from Representative Smith with regards to Bill #A0293-08, a Resolution offered by Alderman Jason Marcus-That the City Council of the City of Everett is hereby opposed to any local aid cuts to Massachusetts Cities and Towns by Governor Deval Patrick; stating that "he will do whatever he can to protect local aid to the City of Everett, in these fiscally demanding times".
COMMUNICATIONS
7. C0216-08
Favorable Traffic Commission Report on Ordinance offered by Councilors Joseph R. King, Eloy Lou Sierra, Stephen Simonelli and Alderman Jason Marcus-To place a stop sign at the bottom of Lexington Park, intersecting Derne Street.
8. C0217-08
Favorable Traffic Commission Report on Ordinance offered by Councilors Joseph R. King, Eloy Lou Sierra, Stephen Simonelli and Alderman Jason Marcus-To place a stop sign on Derne Street, where it intersects with Prospect Street.
9. C0226-08
Traffic Commission Report that Ordinance is not required on this item with a recommendation to refer to the Highway Department: An Ordinance offered by Councilor Peter A. Napolitano-That a "Slow -Deaf Child" sign be erected in the vicinity of 545 Broadway at the request of the resident on behalf of twin six year old deaf boys.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
10. C0223-08 Resolution/s/Councilor John Leo McKinnon
That the board of health start to look into or provide Vaccinations for children for the roto virus to reduce sickness in children, hospitalization and Illness of said children.
NEW BUSINESS
11. C0239-08 Resolution/s/Councilor John Leo McKinnon
That the Mayor consider providing the AED (cardiac machine) be placed on the walls at the Everett Armory and the Everett Recreation Center for the purpose of public safety.
12. C0240-08 Resolution/s/Councilor John Leo McKinnon
That the Mayor and the director of the Rec Center come before the council and explain what they are planning to do with the Rec Center due to the resent article in the Boston Globe. There are a number of parents that are concerned with the closing and rumors that have been circulating around the city and they should be addressed.
13. C0244-08 Common Council Worksheet
Pursuant to Rule 17 of the Common Council, all resolutions requesting the repair, replacement or maintenance of pavement, sidewalks, traffic signals, signage, playground equipment, or other similar requests, shall be placed on a separate worksheet and voted on collectively at the next formal session, and, if passed, referred to the respective departments for their response back to sponsors.
1.Sponsor: Councilor Millie J. Cardello-To repair the sidewalk in front of the Real Auto Glass Company on Chelsea Street, at request of resident/pedestrian who was recently injured at that site.
Referred to: City Services Director.
Adjournment.
Respectfully submitted: C. McCorry, Everett City Council Office council@ci.everett.ma.us
12/8 7PM Board of Aldermen Meeting
12/15 7PM Next Common Council Meeting
12/16 6PM Bills & Accounts Committee Meeting
www.You must be logged in to see this link.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2008 : 7:34:18 PM
|
# 1,2,3-
The Administration is asking to move $35,000.00 into the City Solicitor's Department. What changed in their salaries, since the budget was approved, to warrant another $14,600.00 to be added to the City Solicitors Salaries Account?
#12
Many residents will be interested in what the Mayor and the Rec Director will have to say about the future of the Rec. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/29/2008 : 6:18:33 PM
|
| Let the transfers begin!!! |
|
|
|
arthur
Senior Member
212 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2008 : 06:28:56 AM
|
EVERETT
Stadium project boosted
State approves $500,000 grant
By John Laidler, Globe Correspondent | November 30, 2008
Everett's plans to refurbish its athletic stadium received a major boost last week when the state awarded $500,000 for the project.
Ian Bowles, state Energy and Environmental Affairs secretary, announced the award during a visit to Everett Memorial Stadium on Nov. 21, where he was joined by city officials and Everett's state legislators.
The grant was among 20 totaling $7.4 million the state agency awarded that day for fiscal 2009 under its Parkland Acquisitions and Renovations for Communities program.
In this region, Chelsea, Lynn, Newburyport, Peabody, and Salem also received funding under the program, which helps cities and towns buy land, and build and renovate parks, athletic fields, and other outdoor recreational spaces.
"The Commonwealth is pleased to partner with the city of Everett on a project that will enhance recreational opportunities for the city's youth for years to come," Bowles said in a statement issued by his office.
He said that the stadium, located in an urban area close to two MBTA bus routes, is a "prime example" of Governor Deval Patrick following through on a pledge to revitalize city neighborhoods through investments in urban parks and open-space conservation.
The 5.6-acre Everett Memorial Stadium, located on Revere Beach Parkway, is the home field for the high school's Crimson Tide football team, a powerhouse that has made the Greater Boston League championships the last 14 years, and won the Division One Super Bowl seven of the last 10 years.
Everett's youth soccer and football programs and the Special Olympics also make use of the field on a limited basis.
The project calls for upgrading the existing natural field to synthetic turf. If enough funding remains, it would also provide for adding and rehabilitating bleachers, and improving the field house restrooms.
Mayor Carlo DeMaria, in a prepared statement, said the funding would provide the high school football team "with a stadium that is reflective of its long history of success. More importantly, these enhancements will provide other scholastic teams, local youth sports organizations, and residents with a premier recreational space that can be enjoyed by Everett citizens for years to come."
DeMaria credited the city's legislators, state Senator Anthony Galluccio of Cambridge and Representative Stephen "Stat" Smith of Everett for their help in securing the grant. All three joined Bowles in speaking at last Friday's event, held in one of the stadium end zones.
Marzie Galazka, community development director, said that the project is estimated to cost approximately $1.3 million. The state is committed to covering 62 percent, but no more than $500,000. As a result, if the project ends up costing the projected $1.3 million, Everett would be responsible for the other $800,000.
"The mayor is committed to the project and he will find the necessary funding," Galazka said of DeMaria. She said the city will explore other state or federal grant opportunities, and possible funding from the business community, to reduce the amount of city funds that would be needed. Any city expenditure would require City Council approval.
In its application for state funds, the city requested $500,000 to be used either for improvements to Sacramone Park, located off Santilli Highway and Tileston Street, or for the stadium. Galazka said the state opted to award money for the stadium project.
"Everett is so densely populated and our parks are so heavily used that any time we have an opportunity to utilize grants for rehabilitating them it's a tremendous opportunity," Galazka said.
She said the award is particularly gratifying because this marks the first time in the last decade that the city was eligible for funding under the program. The state had suspended the city's eligibility while Everett worked to replace parkland that lost when it built the new high school on the terraces of Glendale Park. The city met that requirement last year when it completed construction of the third of three parks.
Frederick Foresteire, school superintendent, said the school district is thrilled with the state grant, noting that the project would allow much greater use of the field.
To protect the stadium's natural-grass field for its primary user - the high school football teams - Foresteire said the city now has to restrict use of the facility by other sports programs during any kind of inclement weather. As a result, other sports groups, including the school's field hockey team and youth soccer and football programs, have only limited access to the field.
With synthetic turf, Foresteire said, the limitations posed by weather would no longer exist, so that the field could be made available much more readily to those other groups. He said installing synthetic turf would also eliminate the need to apply chalk boundary lines before every game, a labor-saving benefit that would further ease restrictions on field use.
Enabling more teams to practice and play at the stadium would "do a great deal for our youth programs," Foresteire said.
Let the money start exchanging HANDS |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/30/2008 : 11:49:46 AM
|
Let the money start exchanging HANDS..........is absolutely correct.
I cant believe in these economical times, the city is going to match $500,000.00 for a football stadium. That may be #1 priority to a certain individuals however, I was not aware that football now has so much pull in city government.
Sure, it was a generous grant, with a generous attachment too it.
Couldn't they re-seed until economical times get better? Look at all the other cities and towns that play on grass and still play in the rain. That's what football is about, rain or shine.
As far as matching that money....what about the capital improvement plan?
What about the lack of fire engines or the ones that are in desperate need of work, along with our fire houses?
What about RVC's and Mike Marchese's motion to please put aside some of that money so the elderly can heat their homes??
|
Edited by - Tails on 11/30/2008 11:53:11 AM |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 12/01/2008 : 10:42:16 AM
|
Some comments on tonight's agenda.
1., 2. & 3.
It's hard to know how to evaluate these transfer requests without knowing all of the the details behind them. I think that the Council should have a lot of questions about these transfers. Normally, that would lead to these items being referred to the Finance Committee. That still may happen because some councilors seem to be more concerned with getting out of the meetings as quickly as possible rather than taking care of city business. But with a short agenda to deal with (again) and the fact that one of the line items is already running at a deficit, there's no reason not to deal with the requests at tonight's meeting.
There's a lot that we don't know about these transfers but lets look at the things that we think we do know about them. In the mayor's original budget, the line item submitted for the City Solicitor's Litigation/Professional Services account was budgeted at $45,000. As best as I can recall, the entire $35,000 cut from the City Solicitor's budget all came from this line item. If memory serves me correctly, the City Council wanted to cut the entire $45,000 but they were asked not to by someone (Mr. Henderson?) because of pending litigation. The council's justification for this cut at the time was that there would be plenty of lawyers in the solicitor's office. Remember, at the time that the budget was being debated, Ms. Deveney was slated to become city solicitor; so, that was part of their thinking. But the line item is not just used to hire outside lawyers; its also used for things like expert witnesses and the like.
So where did this need for an extra $20,400 come from? From the pending litigation or from other unexpected litigation? If you've ever tried to estimate your own budget out a year's time, you know that it is not a very easy task, especially for things that are difficult to anticipate. Should the Council have cut this line item this much? Probably not. Their justification has usually been that if more money is needed later, they could always transfer it. On the flip side, I don't recall that the administration but up much of a fight over the cut. If the city budget were run as tightly as it should be, there wouldn't be a lot of money that could be found to be transferred. Also, if things were managed as well as they could be, the city wouldn't have a ton of free cash available to transfer from either. In the tough economic times that are ahead, I believe that it would be in the city's best interest to do more realistic budgeting and not always assume that the money can be found to fill the potential holes in the budget.
To evaluate the $14,600 transfer to City Solicitor's Salaries account, I believe that it is necessary to look at all of the positions in that office and what they are being paid. The approved budget allocated for the department salaries was $237,776, The approved head count for this department minus Ms. Deveney, who was to be paid from the mayor's office as chief of staff, was five. This included a part-time attorney that was scheduled to be phased out after three months; I'm not 100% certain but, I think that they didn't even stay that long. Also, the slot that is filled by Mrs. Mejia, the current city solicitor, was budgeted as a deputy city solicitor at a maximum salary that is more than the city solicitor is allowed to make under a city ordinance. My point is that there should already be some money available in this line item. Part of the request is obviously to give Ms. Berringer a raise for holding the purchasing agent position as well. I'm not saying that she doesn't deserve one; I just believe that this transfer shouldn't be approved without a full review of the salaries that are being paid in this department.
To look at the other side of the equation, it certainly seems appropriate to reduce the Budget Office's Salary Line item. If the previous budget director was making the maximum salary budgeted for the position, not having a budget director for approximately three months alone has a potential savings of $21,500+. This savings, along with paying the new budget director a more reasonable salary, seems like it will support cutting $28,000 from this line item. I don't know of any reasons why the city would have had to do any short term borrowing in the first five months of the fiscal year. As long that is true and the city doesn't anticipated any major short term borrowing needs over the remainder of the fiscal year, it seems acceptable to take $8,000 of the $25,000 budgeted for this line item to use for other needs.
12.
I find it ironic that the city's communication director was the source quoted in the Globe story. Of course, the city has no control over what the paper actually publishes. But I think that it would have been appropriate for city to ask some paper to print a clarification of the story; I'm sure that at least one of the local paper would obliged them. |
Edited by - tetris on 12/01/2008 10:46:23 AM |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 12/01/2008 : 8:58:52 PM
|
1., 2. & 3.
First off, I guess that my memory was faulty about the budget cut as I described it in my pre-meeting comments. It makes more sense that Mr. Henderson would have requested to retain money in a line item in the Personnel budget.
I thought that the Mayor gave a very good explanation of why the transfers to the Litigation/Professional Services line item were needed. The problem that I have is that explanation should have been given during the budget hearings so that the line item would not have been cut so severely in the first place. The City Solicitor certainly didn't give me a feeling of comfort that they won't be back for more money for this line item. But if they are recovering money for the city at the rate that they say they are, it would certainly seem to be justified. To me, it made sense to approve items 1 and 2 tonight.
As someone who believes that important committee meetings such as Finance should be televised (which Councilor DiFlorio actually sponsored earlier in the year), I didn't really see the need to refer item 3 to committee especially since the mayor had no problem with discussing any issues tonight. As city employees, their salaries are public information. As far as the actual raises go, I've already gone on record as supporting a raise for Ms. Berringer for taking on the added title of Purchasing Agent. As far as the other assistant solicitor goes, I'm not saying that she doesn't deserved a raise but her situation hasn't changed as materially since the budget was approved. If the administration felt that she would possibly be in line for a raise at some point during the fiscal year, that situation should have been included in the budget.
I thought that it been discussed that the city didn't need a full time budget director? I doubt that it turned out that way though as $63,000 a year seems pretty high for a part-time employee.
12.
I do believe that the Rec will stay the way it is, at least for the time being, but I'm not sure that we got the whole story about the Field House and the Boys and Girls Club.
Thank goodness there is only one more meeting with Lorrie Bruno as council president.
Joe King means well but time has passed him by as an effective councilor. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/01/2008 : 9:42:31 PM
|
Yes, thank goodness only one more meeting with Lorrie Bruno as president. I'm sorry, I'm sure she's a nice person, but every meeting has been chaotic, never done right, totally out of control, and the favoritism has just further divided people.
That said, this talking over people, and just shouting out, has got to stop. Too many are talking out of line, just jumping in, not being called on, and she has allowed it for a year (from her friends) and I hope there will be changes to that rude behavior with the new president.
You get acknowledged before you speak out. We are not in a school yard playground here. Councilor Simonelli had every right to know what the purpose of those transfers are for, and he and the Mayor were conversing fine, the know it all's need to butt out, and should have been shut down by the president.
Item three could/should have just been handled tonight. What's the big secret about embarrassing people? Their salaries are public information. They knew this going into it, so what's the big deal? This is taxpayer money and we the taxpayers have a right to know how it's being spent. There is no embarrassing situation, they work for US and WE pay the salaries.
Item 12- I don't expect any changes in the Rec Center. I'm not expecting any construction work either. I'm sure the city would love to do it, it's just not financial feasible.
My personal opinion, just come out and say it. Be totally honest up front. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2008 : 3:03:54 PM
|
1+2) I agree that these transfers are justified. As someone who tends not to find fault in the current administration, I will say that I think they could do a better job of communicating some of the behind the scenes initiatives that typically go unmentioned. The fact that the city is cleaning up properties and putting the proper liens on properties to recover costs is a great program. It may not be noticed by everyone, but to the people that live next to or across from an abandoned property the cleanups make all the difference in the world.
12) Sit down for this one......I almost agree with Tails....it is going to be tough to find the money to make the neccessary upgrades to the Rec Center. BUT....I think its important to keep talking about it....I commend the mayor for having discussions about the Rec Center, fieldhouse, Boy's and Girls Club, Stadium Renovations etc...our city has a long history of youth activities, all of which require space and personell to keep the facilities up to date. Taking advantage of grant money when it is available is a good move in my opinion.
13) This issue was on the calendar last night and already being worked on today....not a bad response time. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 2:30:29 PM
|
6:30PM - PRESENTATION TO CHIEF DAVID BUTLER-MASSACHUSETTS EMPLOYEE SUPPORT OF THE GUARD AND RESERVE AWARD
AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA
________________________________________
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMON COUNCIL, MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2008, 7:00 PM, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 3RD FL., EVERETT
PAPERS FROM THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN
1. A0185-08 Ordinance/s/Alderman Jason Marcus
That Ordinance #26 of 1965, "An ordinance for no parking on the west side of Hall Ave" is hereby repealed; with favorable traffic commission report. (Ordained sent down for ordainment.)
2. A0186-08 Ordinance/s/Alderman Jason Marcus
That Ordinance #46 of 1969, "An ordinance for no parking on the southeast side of Hall Ave" is hereby repealed; with favorable traffic commission report. (Ordained sent down for ordainment.)
3. C0216-08 Ordinance/s/Councilors Joseph R. King, Eloy Lou Sierra, Stephen Simonelli and Alderman Jason Marcus
To place a stop sign at the bottom of Lexington Park, intersecting Derne Street; with favorable traffic commission report. (Enrolled in concurrence, sent down for ordainment.)
4. C0217-08 Ordinance/s/Councilors Joseph R. King, Eloy Lou Sierra, Stephen Simonelli and Alderman Jason Marcus
To place a stop sign on Derne Street, where it intersects with Prospect Street; with favorable traffic commission report. (Enrolled in concurrence, sent down for ordainment.)
COMMUNICATIONS
5. C0227-08 Communication
Communication received from Representative Stephen Smith relative to Resolution offered by Councilor Peter A. Napolitano: That the DCR erect a "School Zone" sign within the appropriate distance on Route 16 for both eastbound and westbound traffic in the vicinity of the Whittier School in the interest of public safety.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6. C0200-08 Ordinance/s/Councilor Rosa DiFlorio, Councilor Lorrie Bruno, Councilor William Cardello and Alderman Robert Van Campen
The purpose of the amendment is to make Bradford Street a one-way street from Hancock Street to Cedar Street.
NEW BUSINESS
7. C0246-08 Resolution/s/Councilor Peter A. Napolitano
To respectfully request that Representative Smith appear before the Common Council in January 2009 to provide an update for the citizens of Everett on the status of House Bill #4762 and his efforts to ensure that the Charter Review question is on the Ballot in November 2009.
8. C0247-08 Resolution/s/Councilor Cynthia Sarnie and Eloy Lou Sierra
Request that the traffic department place a red blinking light at the corner of 388 Main Street, at the request of crossing guard and residents. Please invite crossing guard and residents to the next traffic commission meeting with regards to this item.
9. C0248-08 Resolution/s/Councilor Sergio Cornelio
Due to economic downturn expected from the State, that the Mayor consider implementing a home rule petition for a five-year early retirement incentive, so we can have people let go through attrition instead of layoffs.
10. C0249-08 Resolution/s/Councilor William L. Cardello
That the Owner of Dunkin Donuts on Broadway and the Police Chief attend the next public safety committee meeting to discuss traffic on Broadway between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m.
Adjournment
Respectfully submitted:
Caroline McCorry
Administrative Assistant/Office Manager
Everett City Council Office
council@ci.everett.ma.us
SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATES TO NOTE:
12/16 6PM BILLS & ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE MEETING
12/17 6PM FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
12/22 7PM BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING
1-5-09 JOINT CONVENTION (MIDTERM)
1-5-09 REGULAR COMMON COUNCIL (ORGANIZATIONAL)
1-5-09 SPECIAL BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEETING (ORGANIZATIONAL)
www.You must be logged in to see this link.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/13/2008 : 12:26:04 PM
|
| I hope the "charter review" question makes it on the ballot next year. I also hope one of the areas they review is getting rid of the Common Council. I have never seen a more useless bunch of dopes assembled in one place. (not all but most of them) |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/13/2008 : 1:01:56 PM
|
Exactly! It’s time for the taxpayers to do some consolidations to save money. We are the only city that spends uselessly on split government. All it does is slows things down, waste of time, and interferes with important matters that most are not qualified to meet anyway. I'd take the lead on that one.
You think that I believe for one second that no one on the common council is aware that a lawyer is billing the City of Everett $300.00 an hour for work that the City Solicitor is supposed to be doing?? If this was Hanlon or McCarthy….it would be all over the papers and brought up meeting after meeting. Boy……..all these dauntless defenders of the taxpayers changed their tunes all of a sudden.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
COMMON COUNCIL 2008
