“It is not personal, it is business”

Gewirtz critiques home rule petition

by Neil W. McCabe

Two members of the city’s Beacon Hill delegation expressed skepticism for Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone’s creation of a municipal hearing officer, which requires state approval through a home rule petition.

  ‚ÄúThis home rule, discussed at the Board of Aldermen meeting on Sept. 14, 2006, which I attended, raises public policy questions I am hoping will be fully discussed prior to its passage,‚Äù said state Rep. Carl M. Sciortino Jr., who represents 34th Middlesex District, which includes Teele Square.
  The municipal hearing officer would hold hearings in the city, much like the appeal to a parking or traffic ticket, said Ward 1 Alderman William M. Roche.
  Roche, who served as the city‚Äôs acting mayor between December 1998 and May 1999, said regardless of their personal opinions, members of the delegation should support the wishes of city government. 
  Sciortino said he is concerned about testimony he heard at the Sept. 14 meeting that 100 percent of city violation cases appealed to the Somerville District Court were dismissed because of either the court‚Äôs backlog or the low priority of the violations.
  The state representative discovered through conversations with an assistant clerk at the courthouse that no violations were dismissed because of a backlog, he said. ‚ÄúIn fact, roughly 95 percent of the dismissals were of long-term Somerville residents with no prior or subsequent violations, and such dismissals were done in coordination with Somerville inspectors.‚Äù
  The assistant clerk also told Sciortino there was not the groundswell of support for the proposal that had been reported to the board. ‚ÄúThey are not jumping for joy that it‚Äôs being taken out of house,‚Äù he said.
  In his own testimony, the mayor defended his proposal saying it was necessary to operate the city government more efficiently, but also to provide better service to residents who wish to appeal their citations but did not want the hassle of dealing with the court system.
  Alderman-at-Large Denise M. Provost said the mayor‚Äôs proposal is poorly written and will face embarrassing scrutiny from lawmakers.
  There are no provisions for rules of evidence or a procedure to cover instances when the hearing officer recuses himself to avoid a conflict of interest, she said.
  If the defendant loses his case, he still has the option to appeal to the district court, even if he failed to appear at his hearing, she said.
  Provost, who represents the 27th Middlesex District at the Statehouse, said many home-rule petitions, such as expanding a town‚Äôs liquor or changing a local speed limit, move through Beacon Hill easily.
  But, because the mayor‚Äôs proposal creates quasi-judicial office, which will interact with the court system, it will be treated as any other piece of legislation, she said.
  The aldermen debated the proposal for more than an hour to no resolution. The proposal remains an on the committee docket.
  Ward 6 Alderman Rebekah L. Gewirtz said she did not believe the new office was necessary. ‚ÄúThe proposal does not address the problem.‚Äù

  Gewirtz, said the discussion on the proposal was hampered by the City Solicitor John Gannon‚Äôs advocacy.
  Addressing Gannon directly as he testified, Gewirtz said, ‚ÄúYou are the city solicitor, you are not supposed to be editorializing.‚Äù
  Waving his gavel at Gannon just short of hitting the wood of the rostrum, Ward 3 Alderman Thomas F. Taylor, the chairman of the board‚Äôs Legislative Affairs Committee, admonished Gannon and told him he was out of order and not permitted  to offer personal opinions. Gannon sat down.
Then, looking again to Gannon, Gewirtz said, “It is not personal. It is business.”