Two proposed ordinances
For those who haven't seen the latest from the Council. Two proposed ordinances have been suggested, one asks the Mayor for a quarterly financial report on money coming in and going out. The Mayor has said she won't veto it. But says she thinks it places a huge burden on division heads and the CFO. And has made reference to an outdated Town Meeting.
The other claims to help residents in neighborhoods organize into groups like the Friends of Saxonville. The first iteration has many rules, a minimum amount of signatures required and filing for nonprofit status, which the author claims that the groups would have access to elected leaders. They made changes to the number of signatures needed to form the group.
Both of these are just going to be bullet points on campaign flyers if passed. Do we really need permission from the government to assemble as a neighborhood group? I think not. Will these groups really have any more influence than regular residents do now?
While serving on Town Meeting it was a struggle sometimes to get the accurate financial paperwork in our hands on time. Nothing has changed since we became a city. The administration drags their feet to the last possible moment and expects the council to decide not having the opportunity to digest the numbers. So the candidate for Mayor proposes quarterly reports that will take administration and division time to generate.
IMO, both of these are just to make the administration look bad. Will the tax payer benefit from all this posturing... not likely.
How about this idea for an ordinance that benefits the tax payer, before any vehicle or machine of any kind that runs gas or diesel that is requested for replacement is first evaluated by an outside inspector to determine its overall condition. For as many years as i can remember, any request for a car, truck or tractor is made by a division head and supported by pictures of rusty section of a floor board or a number of hours on an engine. We replace to many vehicles without proper vetting.
posted by Jim Pillsbury @ 4:56 PM
14 Comments
14 Comments:
Great commentary and I agree wholehearedly. On replacing vehicles, there has to be a formalized process for determining when a vehicle will be replaced. Without that it is basically at the whim of the department head. We should have a clear and concise checklist for when it is time to replace any vehicle, and also for standard maintenance. I find it surprising that every single vehicle on a list for replacement summited to the city has holes in the floor boards. See odd to anyone else?
So what happens if our very own recognized hate group decides to form a group of other like minded individuals and gets the required signatures to do that. Seems to me like you creating a situation that could get pretty ugly. Let them form their own group without giving them an opportunity to form a group that will need to be recognized by the city.
We need a better and more transparent budget process in Framingham, but this proposal currently being considered does not accomplish that. If this is the best the district councilors can do then we need new, and better informed district councilors.
I get the need for the DC to get information from the city in a timely manner to approve the budget, but this suggestion is not going to do that. They should be proposing a regulation saying that the DC will make a decision on approval/disapproval of the budget presented to them in full 45 days after receipt of that final budget, and are not required to do that any sooner. Then if the city submits it late, then they pay the price. Makes more sense to me than the proposal currently on the table which accomplishes nothing useful.
Speaking of new district councilors, aren’t they all up for reelection this fall? Has anyone heard who is running and who is not of the sitting councilors?
Making it more difficult for people to form community groups is ridiculous. How is that going to help anything? And you are right. The bozo suggesting this is just looking to be able to put something on his campaign literature other than has abysmal record as a state rep and selectman. No wonder he was almost beaten by an unknown for the DC seat.
If I want to form a group with my neighbors then I should be able to form that group without the city’s approval. Stop trying to get your hands in where they don’t belong. Maybe if you spent your time addressing the plethora of issues facing the city instead of making up new regulations we would not be in the position we are in
Access to government officials? Isn’t that what our District Councilors are? As to access to the mayor, even the district council can’t get that so to promise that to the residents if they form a groups is disingenuous at the very least, but an actual lie on their part if you ask me. I have written to my district councilor asking him not to support this and I hope others will do the same.
Does Steffanini really believe that requiring residents to gather signatures in order to form a neighborhood group is going to make it more likely that residents will form neighborhood groups? Of course not. Even he is not that stupid. He just wants to say he actually did something besides complain about the mayor’s performance while he has been a DC.
Curious if anyone knows if a current district councilor decides to run for mayor, can they run for their district council seat in the same election or do they have to choose only one office to run for?
9 councilors and the Mayor are up
The whole notion of attracting more residents to participate from D 8 and 9 is crazy. Making it a function of local government to approval neighborhood groups sounds so unconstitutional. And if it is such great idea.... why hasn't any of the local residents felt the need to be better represented at the council by forming a group?
A very valid point about our more hateful tiny tiny group of ethnic groups and nationalities haters. Can you image the pissing contest in court that would happen if the City said no to a hate group... oh my lord...i can see the millions going out the door now.
I'd ask my councilor to reject it... but it wouldn't matter.
Your councilor is a supporter of the person who made this proposal so no way he is going to listen to the people who elected him. He just pretends that all his constituents think everything he does and his friends do is exactly what they want them to do. Which of course is bullshit. I get a kick out of the fact he is too dumb to recognize that none of us are fooled by him. Dumb is dumb no matter how you try to polish it up.
Jim can you in your role with the League answer the question about if someone can run for Mayor and district councilor on the same ballot?
Well.... I would have bet good money on NOT being able to run for two offices at the same time...so I asked our outstanding Clerk and this is what she wrote: "a registered Framingham voter can run for Mayor, Library Trustee, Edgell Grove Cemetery Trustee (I think they may be looking for someone to run!) and District City Councilor at once. A Framingham voter cannot run for City Council in a district that he/she doesn’t live in. Also, a Framingham voter is required by the Home Rule Charter to be a resident of the district on or before June 1, 2021 in order to be considered eligible".
I am very surprised that charter allows this and can't see any reasons what benefit the voters get from this.
Now for all you speculators... that tidbit of info makes for some interesting and troubling possibilities. we will have to see who pull's papers for what office.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home