(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)

By Will Mbah
Candidate for Somerville City Councilor at Large

At the very end of May, the Special Subcommittee of the City Council on Charter Revision finished its work and sent to the Mayor the draft Amended City Charter. This text was based on the earlier draft that the Charter Review Committee of citizens and city officers had prepared during 2021 and 2022.

The completion of this important work at the Council did not get the attention it deserved, because the city budget review for FY2024 was about to start and the same week, the ceiling fell at Winter Hill School and the Mayor and Council had to respond with emergency actions.

Now that the immediate crisis has been brought under control, it seems appropriate to check back on the progress of the Charter. The Mayor’s office has been responsible at this stage to make final adjustments and then transmit the draft to the state legislature as a Home Rule petition.

What changes are in the revised Charter?

This draft revised Charter has fulfilled two of the purposes that were originally set as goals: First, all of its sections have been re-written in modern language, incorporating gender-neutral terms and the vocabulary of contemporary municipal law, finance and management. Second, there are over 30 detailed changes that improve or clarify structures and process. These include the following:

• A more clear City Council role in approving the appointments of department heads and members of boards and commissions;
• A similar City Council role in filling vacancies of department heads, members of boards and commissions and members of the School Board, with provisions allowing the Council to petition the Mayor if he/she leaves positions open or with temporary officers for too long;
• Clarification of City’s Administrative Code as the regulations to define the structure and powers of all city agencies (without the need for Home Rule petitions to change or create a new department);
• Budget details – changes in the dates for presentation of preliminary budget documents, and the new presentation of City Council budget priorities before the Mayor’s budget proposal in April;
• Adjustments in the dates on which the capital improvement plan is presented to the City Council and the public;
• Transferring to the City Council the power to appoint the City Auditor;
• Authorizing the hiring of a City Chief Administrative Officer;
• Requiring a review of the Charter every ten years, and more frequent periodic review of all city ordinances and the structures of municipal boards and commissions.

What proposed changes were left out of the draft Charter?

Several fundamental changes that were proposed by citizens and groups were not included in the draft, even though they had support among members of the Charter Revision Committee and City Councilors. The decision was made in the end to omit them because their inclusion raised questions of possible non-compliance with state laws and appeared to merit further work on details of structure and process. The final report of the Charter revision Committee had recommended that these issues be referred to study committees to work out the details, find consensus and present more clear proposals in future years. The issues are:

• rank-choice voting in municipal elections;
• a stronger City Council role in the budget process, which could allow the Council to add funds to specific lines, instead of just cutting the amounts proposed by the Mayor;
• a mechanism for public financing of municipal campaigns.
• 16-17 year old voting and
• voting for non-citizen residents in municipal elections.

Another proposal to increase the term of the Mayor to four years was recommended by the Charter Review Committee in its August 2022 draft, but was subsequently removed by the City Council sub-committee.

Finally, the city has already created an experimental program of participatory budgeting, and if it proves successful, it could also be added in a future Charter amendment.

Have we lost an opportunity to make meaningful change?

I was disappointed by the outcome of the Charter Revision process at the end of May because it failed to deal clearly with the primary questions – that is, how to re-balance the authorities of the Mayor and the City Council in the context of a city, where we are trying to increase the variety and scope of services we offer to citizens and broaden opportunities for citizens to be active participants. The weak outcome of all this work does not offer confidence that the city will follow through with the tasks it has left undone.

The Mayor should act without more delay to finish the review and initiate whatever next steps are required. More important, there needs to be a clear timetable, strategy and assignment of responsibilities to the agencies, working with the Council, to undertake the agenda of reforms.

I noted this week the reports from our neighbors in Boston, who have begun to review the outcome of their first year, using a new budget process with stronger Council powers. They were willing to act and now their practical experience should give us guidance.

If you want to learn more or support my campaign, please visit my website at willmbah.com.