PAYING ATTENTION!

Click the Little Devil to
Return to Main Page

Proposed Charter Changes
The Good, The Bad and The Missing

For more than two years Lawrence City Councilor Patrick Blanchette has been fighting what seems like a losing battle to make city government more effective. Blanchette has been chairing the charter review committee proposing to fine tune the way our city officials do business. But the majority of his colleagues were not too eager to make a change that would prohibit the Mayor from running for another office while serving as Mayor. This charter provision would have been a great step towards making sure each mayor focuses on doing one job, running the city of Lawrence.

They also rejected giving the council the power to force department heads to appear before them and answer tough questions about city business. For the last ten years the city council has only been able to request city workers to appear before them. More often than not, the council has been snubbed. They ought to have subpoena power to get these department heads and city workers before the council to explain city business when the mayor is being uncooperative. The City Council is an elected body and represent the tax payers. It is sad that no one wants to be held accountable and shed light on the work being done (or not being done) on our behalf. What is even more sad is that the council does not want to take responsibility of keeping people in line by forcing this issue.

The Council did pass charter review changes that would reschedule our primary elections from October to September. The change would increase the time between the primary and general election from 60 days to 90 days. While most candidates announce their campaigns prior to the summer months, most people do not start paying attention to city elections until after school is back in session (Labor Day) and summer vacations are long over. Changing the city's primary election to September means that candidates will have to campaign July and August, when most people don't care about politics because they are enjoying their summer or are outside the city.

Having more time between the primary and general election is a good idea but, pushing it back to September is going to cause a lot of problems getting people involved and I believe, will result in fewer people taking part in the election process, not more.

Under the proposed charter change future mayors will be sworn in with new city councilors at 7 p.m. on the first business day in January. It will require the mayor to address the City Council at its first meeting in February to discuss the conditions and needs of the city. It will also require the mayor to notify the Council president in writing whenever he is going to be away from the city for three or more days. These changes may seem minor but they will make city government more efficient. There were many times under the Dowling administration when she was absent from city hall for days at a time and nobody knew what was going on.

A provision requiring the city's personnel director to review compensation for all city employees every ten years as well as submit a report with recommended changes to the mayor and City Council will also give the public more information about the inner workings of their government.
There is no doubt in my mind that the School Committee should be paid for their service to the city. Empowering the City Council to establish an annual salary for School Committee members will be one of the more important changes that should be passed. While most of our school committee members have not exactly done their fare share of work over the past fifteen years, those who get elected and actually do the job right put in between 20-30 hours a week. They are in charge of a 100+ million dollar budget. Paying School Committee members a stipend will compensate those who contribute to our city government and prevent city workers from serving on the board, thereby stopping the conflict of interest that has occurred in the past four years with Carol Bannon and Martha Previt.

Another proposed change that is absolutely necessary is mandating that an outside auditor review the city's accounting books at least once a year. When Mayor Dowling took office four years ago she was left with a huge budget surplus. The tax collection process that Mary Claire Kennedy implemented brought in millions in unpaid overdue tax revenue. After four years of Dowling telling us that the city's finances were in great shape (all the while refusing to let us look at the books) we now find out that there is 18 million dollars in outstanding tax bills which were never collected under the Dowling administration. We also have a huge budget deficit. An annual audit gives the council and the public a clearer picture of our city's financial conditions.

Overall, the majority of the propose changes to our city charter will make city government more open and effective. But I can’t help wondering what happens when someone violates these charter provisions once they are passed. What kind of enforcement power will the council have if, for example the Personnel director refuses to cooperate and simply doesn’t give them an update as required by one of the new provisions? What is really missing in our city charter is an enforcement provision that enacts punishment for those who refuse to comply with the charter. After all, you can make all the rules and ordinances you want, but if there is o penalty for breaking the rules the city charter is just a piece of paper with no power whatsoever.