🔨 The Promise of the Charter
Become a Library Trustee | Framingham FORCE Honoring those lost to opioid overdoses | The Civic Week Ahead
Roll out those lazy, hazy, crazy days of summer, Framingham. Not to be a Debbie Downer, but we have a few more weeks of this before everyone is back on schedule for the fall.
In today’s issue, I’m continuing my look at the Charter Review process with some of my thoughts and the Council’s reaction.
Curious about something? Let’s clear it up! Email me at mkfeeney@gmail.com.
A friend shared this with you? Smart friend! Subscribe here to stay in the loop.
The Promise of the Charter
Some history and thoughts…
Let’s take the Wayback Machine: Eight years ago Framingham was in the middle of the debate and drafting of its new Home Rule Charter. For me, it was my first foray into the world of Framingham politics.
Framingham had attempted several times changing its form of government throughout its history. The winds of change blew in 2016-2017. Feeling stuck and held back by our form of government was felt by many. Representation in our government was lopsided - with the “Vacant” Family representing most of South Framingham in Town Meeting and a majority of School Committee members from north of Route 9. Plazas were eyesores, and we couldn’t get out of our way with bringing in new businesses. Town Meeting met for days on end. We were not keeping up with our needs.
In short: Voters wanted better. There was a sense of hope. A belief we can be a stronger community with a structure of government that is more representative, more transparent and accountable, and able to better navigate our complexity and embrace our diversity in these ever changing modern times.
Which brings us to today. Framingham, we’re barely pre-teens in our City Era. We are still having those growing pains.
Here is the good: Representation from every part of this city are now reflected in elected offices, and appointments to boards. We had two School Committee Chairs from south of Route 9 for the first time in decades. Voter participation has increased. In the 2015 town election only 7% (2558) voters went to the polls. In the last Mayor/Council/SC election of 2021, 30.73% (12,259) turned out. Plazas are redeveloped. We’re seeing progress on some outstanding issues, like trails.
Yes, but: The work of the Charter Review Committee was a good exercise in assessing where we are today. Framingham, we’re still stuck. And the suggestions and proposed changes are a reflection of frustration of our current status.
To be clear – The Charter Review Committee deserves our appreciation for their thoughtful discussion, transparency, hard work, and patience. This was no easy task.
The Recommendations: Many of the recommendations from the Charter Review Committee were adjustments that did not need to be codified into what is basically our Constitution. They are necessary adjustments because our elected leaders for the last seven years have not fulfilled the promise of the Charter in its entirety.
Chief Climate and Sustainability Officer? Frustration from our active environmental activists because the city hasn’t installed solar on city buildings and we are struggling to do the absolute basics in being more sustainable.
A budget process requiring more public meetings, time to study, and required to post the budget online? Frustration because no mayor to date has brought councilors or the public into the wider discussion before the budget is packaged for approval.
Benchmarks and deadlines for strategic planning? Frustration from many, including the Strategic Initiatives and Financial Oversight Committee (of which I am chair), that this key piece of the Charter remains ignored.
The Charter Review Committee proposed inserting these measures because of their importance to Framingham. Their recommendations bring best practices many places take for granted to our city. They bridge the gap between what the city government does and what residents want and expect. Each item makes Framingham more transparent, more accountable, and more accessible.
The Charter Review Committee recommendations usher Framingham closer to fulfilling the promise of the Charter. The rest of the work is up to us to keep Framingham moving forward.
Council Charter Discussion Highlights, Part 2
The Role of the Council: The Council can only approve or reject each recommendation. They cannot alter, change or add anything to the document. The Council also sets the election date for voters to approve the changes.
Elected to More than One Office
Consistent Problem: Should Councilors be allowed to serve in more than one elected office at the same time? Over the years some elected officials have served on both the Council and another elected position, or an appointment to another committee. Then either resigned or didn’t run again to solely focus on their Council duties. But it isn’t a constant common problem. And over 40 years, only two people have held elected local office while serving as state representative. However, it is a recurring issue that the Charter Review Committee attempts to resolve.
Charter solution: The Committee recommends no one on the Council, School Committee, or any other elected position can hold two elected seats at the same time. By limiting the number, it creates more opportunities for others to serve.
There are only five offices where people can be elected in Framingham: Mayor, Council, School Committee, Board of Library Trustees, and Edgell Grove Cemetery Trustees. The Mayor is already prohibited from being elected to other offices and holding other jobs.
Motion to reject: District 8 Councilor Leslie White Harvey, who also serves as a Board of Library Trustee, stated she would like this applied to people being appointed to more than one board. Council Chair Phil Ottaviani reminded her that Councilors cannot make changes, so she made a motion to reject the recommendation.
“I was elected to the Library Board which has no money involved. You had something like that happen with the Chair of the School Committee who was getting money for both, and also the state rep. This job we don’t meet in the summer…so it isn’t as heavy as a lift as the City Council. I was voted in for four years and there’s no financial compensation. So, I want to make that clear that I am not getting two sets of monies.”
Supporting the measure: District 1 Councilor Christine Long spoke in support of the recommendation. Long served as the Chair of the then-elected Planning Board and was elected to the Council.
“I served on both of those functions for quite a few months when I was first elected to the City Council. You cannot do this job and be on another board that’s elected and do this job sufficiently. Unless you want to really be working 24/7…it just doesn’t work. If you are going to be a City Councilor, be a City Councilor. Do the work that is required. We have a lot of workload to do here.”
What about appointed positions?: Charter Review Chair Adam Blumer stated that appointed positions were not included because the Council has the right to reject a nomination of someone appointed to more than one role. Additionally, some boards require members of other boards to be appointed due to overlap.
“Two paychecks”: Harvey responded to Councilors’ general comments of not being able to do both roles well, stating she believes she is doing it well.
“I am letting the public know I am serving well and I am not cheating them. I am not getting two paychecks like somebody else did. This is important that the community knows that.”
At Large Councilor Janet Leombruno called a point of order, saying “I think that we need to be careful when we talk about state reps cheating people.”
A Councilor receives a stipend of $5000 a year.
The result: The motion to reject the recommendation failed: 0-11 with Leslie White Harvey voting against her own motion.
Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer
New position for the environment: This new role is focused on bringing sustainability planning into the forefront with all departments in the city. Framingham currently has a Sustainability Coordinator, but this new position can set policy across departments.
Initial concerns: When the issue was first introduced to the Charter Review, it was voted down 1-8. Energize Framingham made a presentation, outlining the state and federal grants the city can tap into and the potential cost savings. Eventually, the vote became 8-1 in favor of inclusion in the Charter.
Creating another position issue: District 4 Councilor Mike Cannon expressed concern with the process, that the creation of positions should be done through the budget process, not in the Charter. Councilors Noval Alexander and Tracey Bryant also expressed similar concerns, with Bryant later voting in favor of the position due to the importance of the topic.
“This is a process more than anything else, it's not the subject matter, it's not the content, it's not the scope of responsibility. It’s to be consistent in our Charter. I would ask and accept a friendly amendment, if we want, to have part of this motion to recommend to the mayor that they consider something like this. I think defining a position in the Charter gets us into some gray area. New positions should be added through the budget process by the Mayor and the Council.” said Cannon.
In support of the role: District 7 Councilor Leora Mallach pointed out other positions are created in the Charter, reflecting their government-wide role.
“As there are other positions listed, Chief Participation Officer being one of them, that do work across departments and on that higher level. It speaks to the prioritization of this community and the nature of the position being multidisciplinary.”
The result: The motion to reject the change failed 2-9 (Cannon, Alexander - Leombruno, Long, Ward, Ottaviani, Bryant, Steiner, King, White Harvey, Mallach)
Budget Timelines
Changing the calendar: In their report, the Committee “felt it was important to stress the need for transparency, collaboration and timely information especially with fiscal matters.”
The timeline changes were driven by the School Committee, citing the need for more time for hiring and project procurement.
Discussed recommendations are:
Moves the Mayor’s budget submission from May 1 to March 1. The 60 day window now becomes 120 days;
Finance Subcommittee receives an additional week to review the budget;
Mayor is required to hold a budget hearing prior to their formal budget submission to the Council;
Capital Budget approval changed from June, coinciding with the operating budget, to the end of February.
Concerns over timelines: At Large Councilor and Finance Chair George King made a motion to reject extending the timeline from 60 days to 120 days.
King is concerned that budget decisions will be made earlier without full information, like funding updates from the State House.
“Having worked with it for seven years, I understand the desire of the Charter Review Committee to allow for more time and that’s always appreciated. I don’t feel we have been all that rushed by the whole sixty-day thing over the seven years we’ve done it. It hasn’t been a huge problem and I think it brings an advantage. It makes us a little more nimble. It allows us to make changes right up to the end of the fiscal year,” said King.
Calendar change: Confusion ensued between King and District 3 Councilor Adam Steiner, when Steiner said he supports elongating the budget process.
“My hope is that this will just stretch that out a little bit and give time for feedback from departments and from the public on changes that are made,” said Steiner.
However, the biggest change is not in the length of the process, but it’s placement in the calendar.
“We would have loved to have you guys come and said “give us 35 days for the Finance Subcommittee”, we probably would have given you 35 days,” said Blumer. “We tried to tread lightly on making substantial changes because we were worried that you would be worried about the timeline of getting done.”
The Finance Committee now has 28 days to discuss, instead of 21.
The motion: King rescinded his motion because he didn’t “really care where in the calendar it is.”
Moving onto the Capital: King expressed concern with the new timeline of the Capital budget, stating the Finance Subcommittee will be new every two years, and new members will have to approve the capital budget without participating in the full review.
Mallach, a member of the Finance Subcommittee, commented that anyone can watch and follow Finance Subcommittee meetings.
“Adopting this measure will save money. Every year the school department gets approval in June for certain projects that need to be procured throughout the summer and fall. And by that time you already missed the construction schedule and construction cost calculation goes up a minimum of 4% per year in recent years.” commented District 4 School Committee member and SC Finance Chair Adam Freudberg in response to the change.
No motion was made, so the recommendation stands.
Council Approves Changes
After 3 and a half hours of debate and voting, the Council approved 11-0 the recommendations made by the Charter Review Committee.
Setting the Election
Next steps: The Council voted to place the recommendations on the November 4, 2025 ballot. It will be a municipal election with Mayor, Council, School Committee, Library Trustees and Cemetery Trustees on the ballot.
Why not this November?: The City Clerk states the City would have to run two elections because the Charter question cannot be on a state ballot. It would require separate ballots, separate voting lists and separate check-ins. It would cost the city much more money than running a special election.
A special election would cost $50,000.
Expect to hear about these charter changes a year from now.
To read a breakdown of all the new changes to the Charter, please review this very helpful document with the recommendations and the why.
Become a Library Trustee
Love libraries? Want to get more involved in Framingham?
Throw your hat in the ring to become a Library Trustee!
The Library Board of Trustees is an elected 12 member board. Library Trustee meetings are held in the Main Library Trustees Room at 7 pm on the second Monday of the month from September to June.
Due to a member’s resignation, there is a spot open. Upon appointment, the individual will serve until December 31, 2025.
A new library trustee will be selected at a joint meeting of the Council and the remaining Library Trustees this fall.
Interested? Submit your cover letter and resume on the city website by Friday, August 30, 2024.
Framingham FORCE Honoring those lost to opioid overdoses
Please join Framingham FORCE in remembering those individuals who lost their lives to opioid overdose during 2023 in Massachusetts. FORCE will be planting the flags on Wednesday, August 14 at 6:00 pm at Framingham Centre Common.
To learn more about Framingham FORCE, visit their website.
(MKF note: I am a member of the FORCE Board. Hope to see many at the Common tomorrow!)
The Civic Week Ahead
Monday, August 12
Tuesday, August 13
Wednesday, August 14
In Closing…
There is a lot in this issue, I know. If you have any questions about the Charter changes, drop me a line. We can continue to dive into it, and connect with some of the Charter Review folks. (FYI - that Committee has finished their work and is no longer meeting.)
Primary Election Day is quickly approaching! I have reached out to all candidates for the Governor’s Council District 2 and the competitive 7th Middlesex District State Representative race with a Q&A. I’m doing what I did last year to help you learn more about the candidates.
Have a great rest of the week,
Mary Kate
Thank you, I truly appreciate your doing this. It really gives insight to what’s going on in the city.
Thank you for this thorough breakdown and analysis! It’s hard to find this level of visibility. Keep up the great work!