| Author |
 Topic  |
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2008 : 6:06:28 PM
|
Billydee,
Thanks for the post. No problem with the delay; sounds like you were able to find out some interesting information.
I think you misunderstood "my can of worms" comments. If Ms Deveney were to remain on the city payroll, who would the "real" city solicitor be? As far back as January at a "get to know the new administration" meeting with the Chamber of Commerce (I think) that was rebroadcast on ECTV, the mayor referred to Ms. Deveney as "chief legal council". Maybe this was just the Mayor tipping his hand of what was coming in the future but it may be something more as well. As a lawyer, a chief of staff job is probably not truly fulfilling enough for Ms. Deveney; she's probably bound to get involved in the matters of the city solicitor's office at one level or another. Perhaps the mayor's new plan to justify her salary is to have her work part of her time under Mrs. Mejia; I'm not sure how well that would work out. Maybe a better idea would be to have Ms. Deveney take care of the personnel office responsibilities that were going to be assigned to city solicitor's office. But, as I believe that this was something that Mrs. Mejia had responsibility for under the prior structure, maybe that's not the best choice either. With your information that Ms Deveney may have another job offer on the table, I think I'll wait until Monday night to see how this plays out. But I'll certainly listen if you dig anything else up between now and then.
I've written quite a lot about my perception that things seem to get very bogged down in this administration and didn't have a real clue, only guesses, as to why before. Your post gives the first possible insight into that. I have no reason not to believe the claims in your post. However, as I type this reply almost three hours later, I'm amazed that no one has attempted to shoot down these claims yet. If you had posted this information any other time during the week than Friday afternoon, I think that the situation would be very different. I'll listen to both sides but I'm likely to believe the information that backs up my own observations best.
In another thread about yesterday's Leader-Herald commentary, I posted that I thought it was a fair and balanced piece but I didn't necessarily agree with everything in it. I still stand by that because I look it as a start. Everything written in the local papers, with the possible exception of the handling of the VSO situation, has pretty much painted a pretty rosy picture of the local situation for the first six months of 2008. If any of the local papers took as hard of a look at the goings on of both the administration and the city council as some of the bloggers do, I'd think that they could find a lot more things to comment on. So, I gave them praise for a start but I'd like to see them do more.
As it was explained during the budget process, I was all for the added position in the purchasing agent's office to take care of things that aren't presently getting done. With the revelation that the person holding this position is the mayor's cousin, I'm going to have to strongly reconsider that position.
Thanks for the time and effort that you put into your posts. |
 |
|
|
italianmoe
Member
32 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2008 : 10:35:40 PM
|
| I have 2 questions. Does GTA have a contract & did it go out to bid? Just wondering Thanks |
|
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2008 : 02:42:06 AM
|
Moe,
I assume that you are talking about street sweeping. Not sure if GTA has a contract. I believe at the budget hearings, the mayor said that GTA was chosen because they were on the state approved bid list, so it didn't technically go out to bid. |
|
|
|
Ellen
Senior Member
173 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2008 : 1:40:38 PM
|
| DeMaria actually only won by 313 votes. I am sure he has already lost more than that. If he continues in this direction just about anyone could beat him in the next election. He will no longer get the vote from the Hanlon people. I would like to see DiPerri run. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
 Posted - 06/21/2008 : 5:43:40 PM
|
| Personally, I want to see VanCampen take on Carlo. I think he can run circles around him and would do a heck of a good job! |
|
|
|
Cam
Member
82 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2008 : 12:05:54 AM
|
| RVC is a good enough guy, but word on the street is he can't raise enough money to take on Carlo. RVC doesn't have a TeeBoo. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2008 : 09:42:40 AM
|
Van Campen may not have anyone with big money behind him, but there are plenty of people who will happily contribute small amounts that will add up very nicely. As long as he keeps in mind who his backers are when he plans his fundraisers, I think he'll do just fine.
Like many others, I had high hopes for Carlo and am extremely disappointed in the way things have gone.
Carlo's recent fundraisers have been ridiculously priced @ $200/$250 a head. That's way over the head of most of this city's voters and, in the eyes of many, makes him look greedy. He's pandering to the wealthier business people but has apparently forgotten that many of them don't live, or vote, in this city.
His new hires are receiving paychecks the average Everett citizen can only dream about. To add insult to injury, they worry every day about how they're going to pay their new, higher, tax bill [that pays those salaries] and still pay the mortgage and feed their family.
I don't think Carlo is considered as the hard working kid that made good anymore. He's being viewed as an elitist who travels in a different circle and can no longer relate to people who live in a house with one bathroom and no air conditioning. |
|
|
|
nicholas
Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2008 : 12:21:01 PM
|
Justme, I agree with your statement that Carlo is not "the hard working kid that made good anymore" Like you I am leaning toward Mr. VanCampen. The irony of my statement is that the election is a year a half from now. After Hanlon's first 6 months, I still supported him. I just can support Carlo right now.
Billydee, I also agree with your statement that Carlo seems to be running the City from the sidelines. He basically seems ill prepared for the job of Mayor and has been given extremely poor advice on consolidating positions. I believe your sources at City Hall after my mother's visit to City Hall in March. She paid her water bill at 7:50 AM because the girls in that office would let her. She went upstairs to say hello to Carlo since he always smoozed her and her girlfriends at fundraisers. The time was 8:05 AM and the Mayor's Office was not open yet, although City Hall starts at 8:00 AM. Mr Hendricks from Personnel asked her to wait for the Mayor in his office. The Mayor's Office opened at 8:20 AM. When Carlo did not show up by 8:30, my mother left a little disappointed. She and I both saw Mr. Hendricks during the Budget hearings. She commented, "I can't believe my friend Carlo is throwing him under the bus when he shows nothing but respect for the Mayor. He even tried to cover for him the morning Carlo's Office opened late." I beleive that we did not know Carlo at all while he was Alderman. I agee with your view that he is lazy. I am old school. I believe in the good old work ethic. If you can't show up for work on time or not at all, what good are you? "Carlo, you have time to clean up your mess. But today I am not going to hold my breath." |
|
|
|
nicholas
Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2008 : 4:55:41 PM
|
| One silver lining in events of recent weeks in Everett was the vote of the Common Council last Monday night. It decided to send many of the Mayor's finance orders into the City Council's Finance Committee for further review. Far too often the City Council merely rubber stamps the Administration's proposals and orders without fully discussing or probing into them. It did that with the Mayor's horrendous FY '09 Budget for the most part. But it did not do that last Monday with finance orders, like the transfer of $2 million from free cash to the taxes. We don't need a tax break this year to have a tax burden next year. The Common Council and the Board of Aldermen need to "step up" when the Mayor does not. So again thanks for last Monday night's vote, Common Council. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2008 : 5:14:25 PM
|
| I am hoping that the Common Council and Board of Alderman has finally figured out that the voters are paying close attention to the goings on at City Hall. We want and need them to take better care of our tax dollars. |
|
|
|
nicholas
Member
6 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2008 : 8:17:36 PM
|
This was a good week for the Everett taxpayers. The City Council voted last night to send an important tax matter back to the Mayor as sponsor. The Mayor proposed transfering $2 million in free cash to this December's tax bill. The problem with the proposal is that he already transferred $2 million from free cash to the Dec taxes. If the City Council approved this order, the taxpayers would get a $ 4 million tax break this year but would pay for it in our December 09 tax bill. Why? The $4 million break means that the City will have to raise an additional $4 million next year to pay for the FY '10 Budget. So, thank you Common Council. You are finally stepping up. When you step up, the Mayor backs down on his tax foolish proposals.
At dinner tonight at Mothers, she told us that watched the Finance Comm Meeting last Tuesday. Mayor DeMaria told the Councilman Napolitano that the Hendricks guy is staying in his position in Personnel at least through September. It's hard to talk to my mother about taxes (including the transfer order I have opposed from the beginning). But she and I have been on the same page about him since we found out he was fired. If Jimmy Hendricks is trying to bring the City health care costs down to save the taxpayers more money, why not keep people like that. So my Mother and I both thank you, Mr. Mayor, for seeing the light on a polite employee who looks out for you and for us as taxpayers. We all make mistakes. It is a good Mayor who admits it and corrects it before it bites him and the taxpayers in the butt. |
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2008 : 11:56:02 AM
|
Not sure how this affects the budget but, this morning department heads were advised of the following:
Gas allowance elimination
Gas for city vehicles only
Travel & mileage reimbursement elimination
This means department heads will stop going to meetings with their peers which is not necessarily a good thing. A little oversight would make more sense.
No Step increases for department heads for FY09
This will help to improve the bottom line but does nothing for morale. I know I wasn’t happy with the small increase I got this year from my employer, I’d be really po’d if I got nothing! Especially knowing the salaries he’s paying his new hires!
|
|
|
|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2008 : 2:17:44 PM
|
What bothers me is the budget was passed with those step increases intact. Can he change that after the fact? I understand he pulled all the paperwork that he had signed and was being processed. I'll bet there's a lot of upset department heads right now!
I'd say we have ANOTHER one term mayor................... |
|
|
|
kimmy
Member
32 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2008 : 2:29:49 PM
|
| I thought the alderman approves the spending. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2008 : 2:59:42 PM
|
That’s not my interpretation of it. I spoke with an Alderman a while back who didn’t know that we were paying GTA $3,000.00 per week for street sweeping since April 1st. He knows now. I also don’t think the Alderman sees the bids that go out and I don’t trust this Budget Director/Purchasing Agent. I’m sure there is plenty more that none of the City Council are privy too.
Southbridge didn’t like him and he resigned because he was going to go anyway. I don’t trust him with the bidding and purchasing too. Having this one person for Budget AND Purchasing…..it’s a conflict and wrong and it’s only to justify his salary. Totally not fair to other city employees (especially that live in the city) and the taxpayer.
BTW…. Since appointing the new City Solicitor, who’s the Personnel Director? I doubt it’s her, even though that’s how her salary was justified.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Budget FY 09
