>>Valley Patriot>> |
Methuen was originally governed by the Acts and Resolves of 1725, which eventually evolved into the first Home Rule Charter established in 1973. It continues to be amended to what we have today. The Charter lays out the rules and regulations for a thoughtful government to operate. It is always there as a foundation and it isn’t until a question arises that people really stop to examine its contents. We refer to it routinely in our daily operation of the City. A thorough examination takes place only when there is a crisis, or a balance of power is questioned. Witness the most recent events in our City with the resignation of our City Solicitor. Some highlights of the Charter will be valuable at this point. Methuen’s Home Rule Charter defines the branches of government and the necessary checks and balances that seek to provide a smooth-running government. It outlines the power of the executive and legislative branches of government. Article 2 of the Charter describes the Legislative Branch. It speaks of the composition of the City Council and its nine members: six councilors representing the three districts of the City and three at-large. Article 3 of the Charter defines the Executive Branch. It describes the office of the Mayor as the Chief Executive Officer of the City. There are many duties under section 3-2. For example, it states that the executive powers of the City shall be vested solely in the Mayor. It clearly states (3-2-13) that the Mayor supervises all departments, commissions and offices except the City Council, the School Committee, the City Accountant, the City Solicitor and the Clerk of the Council. Article 3-2-15 speaks of how the Mayor shall attend all regular meetings of the City Council and have a voice but no vote. Under 3-2-15 (d.), the Mayor must keep complete records and render them as often as may be required by the City Council. Further, under 3-2-15 (e), the Mayor shall keep the City Council fully advised as to the needs of the City and make recommendations. It is essential to understand the charter and the various sections when trying to appreciate the roles of the executive branch and the legislative branch during the recent events in Methuen. Section 3-4, Temporary Appointments to City Offices, states “...Whenever a vacancy, either temporary or permanent, occurs in a City office and the needs of the City require that such office be filled, the Mayor may designate the head of another agency or a City officer or employee, or some other person, especially fitted by merit and fitness, to perform the duties of the office on a temporary basis until such time as the position can be filled as otherwise provided by law, Charter or ordinance.” It is my understanding that it is from this section that the Mayor offered a suggestion for an interim City Solicitor due to the immediate needs of the city. The City Council did not appreciate this recommendation, given Section 2-8, Council Staff, and especially Section 10-9, City Solicitor Appointment/Time of Taking Effect, “...The provision of Section 2-8 (c) relative to the appointment of the City Solicitor shall take effect on July 1st, 1986, provided, however that the City Council shall, upon the effective date of the act, assume supervision and direction of the City Solicitor and he/she shall become directly responsible and accountable to the City Council.” The office of the City Solicitor is clearly under the responsibility of the City Council. There were many questions relative to the sequence of events and actions of the Mayor and the police department surrounding the resignation of the City Solicitor. As a City Councilor, I was notified in a timely manner by the Mayor herself. In an attempt to bring the City Council together and share whatever information was deemed appropriate (given the ongoing investigation and necessity of insuring due process for all parties involved), the Mayor utilized Section 3-5 (b) of the Charter. This involves Special Meetings of the City Council and states: “The Mayor may at any time call a special meeting of the City Council for any purpose by causing a notice thereof to be delivered in hand or residence of each member of the City Council.” I received my notice and felt it was my responsibility to be present and represent my constituents. I also attended out of respect for the Mayor. But this meeting did not transpire, because there wasn’t a quorum. The open meeting law requires that: “… all meetings of a quorum of any governmental body, board, committee, or subcommittee, however constituted, held to discuss any public policy matter within body’s jurisdiction that needs a quorum to decide, even if no decisions are made.” The City Council failed to produce a quorum. The meeting was adjourned. The mayor made a thoughtful and brief statement. There was an expectation that the City Council would hold a special meeting as prescribed under the Rules of Procedure 2-7 (c), but this did not happen. This is a sad day for the City of Methuen. Hopefully, there is now a greater understanding of the Charter. The certain victim in this case is the City itself. This is a time when the taxpayers expect their government, both elected and appointed, to work together toward a solution. I am of the belief that any politicizing of this situation is not only unnecessary and inappropriate, it is damaging. I look forward to due process for all parties involved. Like many others who have voiced their opinion, I have confidence in our Police Department and the Chief, as well as in the Mayor. Without that belief, what have we got? *Send your questions
comments to ValleyPatriot@aol.com |
Constitutions and charters are
written for the purpose of providing rules for good
government.