By Adam Swift
The Town Council will remain a nine-member body for the foreseeable future.
Last week, the council voted on proposed charter changes recommended by the Ordinance Review Committee (ORC). While a number of proposals will be forwarded to the state for a potential vote by town residents in November, one recommendation which would have cut the number of town councilors from nine to seven and done away with precinct seats failed to pass muster with the council.
In addition to the council’s composition, the council also failed to approve a part of that recommendation that would have cut a councilor’s term from four to two years. A similar measure to increase the Town Council President’s term from two to four years also failed to move forward.
A charter change recommendation needed a yes vote from six of the nine councilors to potentially be placed in front of voters in the fall.
The remaining recommendations from the ORC did gain the council’s approval, and will appear on the November ballot provided the state deems they can legally move forward.
Some of those proposed charger changes include tougher language in the council’s abandonment language for members who consistently miss meetings, and a recall provision for elected officials.
Council President James Letterie said that the recommendations from the ORC on the council composition and term lengths were part of an effort to increase participation in elections and potentially attract candidates so there are more contested races.
But a number of councilors said those recommendations would either not achieve that goal or would weaken representation for the town’s residents.
“I think it’s important to remember that representative government isn’t about square mileage, it’s about people and it’s important that the residents have someone to go to,†said Precinct 3 Councilor Hannah Belcher. “There’s a clear division of responsibilities across town. Precinct 3 has some very unique issues and I would hate to see their representation get pushed away.â€
Several councilors also noted that shortening the council term to two years from four wouldn’t necessarily be beneficial for the town or councilors.
“The learning curve is big,†said Councilor-at-Large Rob Demarco, he said, adding that if someone wants to represent Winthrop, it wouldn’t matter if the term was two or four years.
However, Demarco said he would rather let the voters decide on the length of term.
Belcher agreed.
“Of the three suggestions (for council composition and terms), I think this has the most merit on both sides and I’d like to see what the people want,†she said.
Letterie said he didn’t see much merit in two-year terms for the entire council, and noted that a three-year term would be a good compromise. However, he said, under state law the municipal elections have to be held on odd-numbered years.
The council did vote to support the recommendation for updated abandonment language in the town charter. Currently, the language states that a councilor can miss up to half the meetings during a year before the abandonment clause kicks in.
Under the revised language, the abandonment clause would go into effect if a councilor misses three consecutive meetings, or half of meetings over a three-month period. There is also language where councilors can overturn the clause if there is a suitable reason why a councilor has missed the meetings.
“I’m in favor of this one, I think it actually solves a problem,†said Precinct 6 Councilor Stephen Ruggiero.
The councilors also voted to support the recall provision in the charter. There was some initial hesitation about whether the language was strong enough to prevent nuisance recalls, but a closer reading of the recommendation proved that it set a high enough bar for most of the council.
To initiate a recall, a resident would need to file an affidavit with 4 percent of registered voters either town-wide or in a precinct, depending on the position. Once the petition was issued, there would then would be 28 days to gather the signatures of 20 percent of the registered voters to trigger a recall election.
Also, a recall could not be held six months after an official is elected, or six months prior to an election.
According to Letterie, the townwide numbers to trigger a recall would be roughly 500 signatures to pull a petition, and about 2,400 signatures to trigger the actual election.
“I think it is a high standard if you are looking for a recall petition,†said Letterie.
Letterie also noted that the recall provision is a tool he hopes the town never has to use, but that is there if needed.
The council also approved the recommendation for a charter change requiring multiple member boards to elect their own chairs and vice chairs at the beginning of the year.
A recommendation to change the way the town fills vacancies on town boards did not gather the necessary six votes. Currently, the Town Council and the board with the vacancy meet together to fill a vacancy. There was some concern that this wasn’t fair because the council would have more members than the affected boards. However, there were some questions about the legality of the change and the need to have the highest ranked officials in town involved in the process.
There were also a handful of recommendations that were ordinance changes that do not need the approval of the town’s voters. Letterie said those recommendations will be taken up by the council at a future meeting.