(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries and letters to the Editor of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

We are members of Somerville’s Charter Review Committee writing in response to Nate Clauser’s letter to the editor dated May 3, 2023. While we share Mr. Clauser’s desire to rebalance the powers of City Council in our local government, and in fact made transparency one of the key values of our charter recommendations, calling a roll call vote is unfortunately not likely to bring about the outcome we all would like to see.

Somerville needs a new charter. In addition to raising balance-of-power issues, the current charter is antiquated in many other important ways. It is confusing, and many of its provisions are outdated, overruled by state law, or outright offensive. Some — like its proviso that wards should have no more than 1,000 male voters — check all three boxes. It needs not just small tweaks, but a major revision. An overhaul of this type requires Somerville to follow the process for home rule petitions. In other words, after being approved by City Council and the Mayor, our proposed charter must be approved by the entire state legislature – many members of which are less progressive and less trusting of local legislative bodies than we are here in Somerville.

Each of us entered the charter review process thinking that it would be a no-brainer to include more budgetary power for the Council by giving them the ability to reallocate funds. Then we heard repeatedly from experts that there is absolutely zero chance that the legislature will approve that change. At best, the legislature would cut that provision, and we would be left with the state default budget rules, which are less favorable to the Council than what we are proposing. At worst, the legislature could tank our entire draft charter, sending us back to the drawing board.

Some might ask: what about Boston? Doesn’t their council have the ability to reallocate money in the budget? The answer: yes, they do, but they went about it through a different process (G.L. c. 43b §10(b)) that runs through the Attorney General’s office rather than the legislature. That process, however, only works for narrow changes to the charter. It is not feasible for us here, where we need a larger overhaul. However, it might be an option in the future if our current charter reform effort is successful.

Holding a roll call vote would jeopardize all of the very important progress we are trying to make by reforming our charter. This charter review process is not the only opportunity to rebalance budget power and we hope that city councilors who campaigned on this issue continue to use their platforms and power to strategically bring about the change Somerville’s residents support. As the passage of budget power is unlikely through the legislature, we on the charter committee would like to see the more politically viable priorities of Somerville residents reflected in our city’s founding document.

This revised charter simply must pass. It is a massive improvement over the old one, and includes numerous other important provisions to help address the imbalance of power between the Mayor and Council: it gives the Council an effective check on the hiring of department heads, allows the Council to time-limit temporary appointments of department heads and board and commission members (which under the current charter can stay in place indefinitely without Council approval), requires the Mayor to collaborate with the Council in the budget process, and makes changes to the budget timeline that are more favorable to the Council. The draft also provides for a comprehensive charter review every 10 years, and thus builds in opportunities to address structural problems that arise in the future. In order for this charter to succeed in the legislature, however, unanimous support from Council and the Mayor will be required.

As volunteer members of the Charter Review Committee, we spent nearly two years reviewing every aspect of our local government. We did extensive community outreach, and heard public comment at the beginning of each of our biweekly meetings. We listened to all perspectives, and adopted a consensus-based approach to decision-making. At every turn, we were guided by the values of our city and made recommendations that we believe are in the best interest of our city.

Approving the revised charter currently before Council is in the best interest of our city.

Sincerely,

Jess Lieberman, Ward 6, Charter Review Committee Member
Laura Pitone, Ward 5, School Committee Representative to the Charter Review Committee
Beverly Schwartz, Ward 1, Charter Review Committee Member
Kat Rutkin, Ward 1, Charter Review Committee Member
Zoe Iacovino, Ward 5, Charter Review Committee Member
Ona Ferguson, Ward 5, Charter Review Committee Member