The Joke’s on Us

The great American humorist Will Rogers once said, “I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.” After watching the final Board of Aldermen meeting of 2004, it would appear that the joke is on us.

It would be difficult to point to the most ridiculous statement of the evening, but it is safe to say that the majority of them were made by Ward 5 Alderman Robert Van Campen, who served as President of the Board during 2004, while giving the traditional farewell speech to his colleagues. His predecessors have generally “taken the high road” and used this opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of the Board during the year; Van Campen used his time at the microphone to recite a litany of complaints against the Ragucci administration.

Van Campen specifically referenced two points that are worth examining more closely. He:

1). accused the Mayor of “playing the blame game,” pointing to the December 13 meeting of the Board of Aldermen in which the Mayor discussed the financial condition of the City and the circumstances contributing to the many challenges faced in managing it.

2). attempted to defend the activities (or lack thereof) of the Finance Committee and the responsibility of its members to the taxpayers of the City.

Point #1: Among the contributing factors outlined by the Mayor at the December 13 meeting were the reductions in local aid, the increase in water rates, and overspending by the School Department. Van Campen and others may look at these factors as finger-pointing on the part of the Mayor, but it is also a reality that local aid has been cut, water rates have increased, and the School Department overspent its fiscal ’04 budget by half a million dollars.

The Mayor also referenced the fact that figures indicate that Everett does not receive its fair share of lottery reimbursement. Van Campen felt that the Mayor was using this fact as an instrument of blame as well; the reality is that the Mayor referenced this fact as he pointed out that one of the solutions to the financial challenges is to increase revenue and to ensure that Everett gets its fair share of what is available from state programs. The fact is that in the City of Everett, annual sales of the lottery in FY04 were $36 million; from this, the city received a reimbursement of only $3 million, while other cities and towns that spent far less, on a percentage basis, received larger reimbursements from the State. This is an issue that the Board of Aldermen should be embracing, fighting to get every dollar they can for the City, instead of using it as their own instrument of blame against the Administration.

Point #2: Perhaps the most ridiculous statement made by Alderman Van Campen came in his attempt to defend the Joint Finance Committee against an accusation made by the Mayor that the members of the Committee have not fulfilled their obligation to the taxpayers because they have failed to meet regularly to address the financial needs of the City. Van Campen’s defense is based on the fact that the Finance Committee has met 5 times in the past 18 months – five times in the past eighteen months. This, proclaimed Van Campen, indicates that the Finance Committee “has met its obligations.”

A closer look at reality is warranted here as well. The sitting Finance Committee of 2004 met twice this year – on March 4 and again on March 30. That the previous Committee met three times in the last six months of 2003 is a separate issue. It is the current Finance Committee that had the responsibility to review fiscal ’04 expenditures in order to properly prepare for the fiscal ’05 budget. It is the current Finance Committee that had the responsibility to operate proactively in anticipation of the revaluation process and subsequent increase in property taxes. Meeting twice in 12 months, when the City has been facing such difficult financial challenges, can hardly be considered meeting an obligation to the taxpayers, and any elected official who thinks that it does, is setting the bar very low. The voters of Everett deserve better.

The Board of Aldermen has proven in recent weeks that they have little interest in accepting responsibility or “going the extra mile” to do their job. They make constant references to their “part-time” status and point their own finger of blame at the administration while offering no solutions of their own to what they perceive as the financial mismanagement of the City. At least two members of the Board of Aldermen are rumored to have an eye on the corner office, and neither of them has much of a record to run on. It appears, instead, that they will use the unimaginative yet typical political tactic of tearing down their opposition.

Will Roger was right – and the joke is on us.

Oh What a Year It Was!

In just a few days, we will be saying good-bye to 2004, a year that brought many challenges locally, nationally and around the world. In our city, we received news that our Superintendent of Schools had been indicted on a count of receiving stolen property; we saw the School Committee and the Mayor doing battle over alleged broken promises, fiscal mismanagement, and the need to place the Superintendent on administrative leave; our property taxes (and property values) went up, as did the cost of doing business in the city; and rumors about Election 2005 (our local municipal elections scheduled for next year) are already making the rounds.

"Our parkland replacement plan was finally approved by the National Park Service, and we will have a new high school!"

Our Crimson Tide football team gave us another fabulous season, and although the final prize of another Super Bowl win was just out of reach, we are proud of our team!!!

Our Patriots achieved another Super Bowl win and, against all odds, our Red Sox Reversed the Curse!!!

Our Country endured a difficult presidential election season and witnessed the most contentious campaign in recent history. Yet democracy – and George Bush – prevailed and proved to us once again that, as flawed as our electoral system may be, we are truly privileged to be able to take part in it.

Our young men and women continue to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, and sadly, we are losing young people every day in a war that is becoming more and more difficult to defend.

We saw school children slaughtered in Russia.

And as we strapped on our boots to face our first big snow storm of the season, Mother Nature unleashed her wrath on the unsuspecting people of Asia, where more than 44,000 people are dead across 11 nations, thousands more are injured, and at least one million people are homeless as a result of a massive earthquake and subsequent tsunami. Think of these people as you complain about shoveling and poor driving conditions. Things could be so much worse.

And in 2004, the weblog was born, and The Everett Mirror launched as the first weblog dedicated to life in the city we love.

We at the Mirror are grateful for the support that you have shown us since our debut in September. We hope that we’ve raised issues and provided information that will give you a perspective you might not have considered. Our goal is to continue to bring you information about the City, our elected officials, and happenings in the community, as well as thoughts on cultural and world issues. We welcome your comments and ideas. What are the issues that matter to you? What are your hopes for our city and the world around us in 2005? Please continue to post your comments and let us know how this blog can serve you.

We’re coming into a new year . . . another chance to get it right, to make things better. What mark will you make in the New Year? How will you help make things better?

Thank you for your continued support of The Everett Mirror. We wish you a safe, happy and healthy 2005!!

Best wishes from Campbell, Elizabeth & David -- The Everett Mirror

Under Suspension: Thoughtful Planning

The last meeting of the year is usually a fairly quiet event, and the Monday, December 20, meeting of the Common Council was no exception – excluding one item placed under suspension. Agenda items that are placed under suspension, meaning those that weren't submitted in time to be placed on the regular meeting calendar, are usually innocuous but needful, including stop signs and handicapped parking resolutions. This was not the case when the Mayor slipped a major piece of business under suspension, effectively asking members to make a “quickie” decision regarding the purchase of two dump truck/snow plows at a cost of more than $252,000.

Al Borgonzi, City Services Department Head, made a good case for the purchase; the fleet of snowplows in the city is certainly aging, and two critical pieces of equipment would need more than $40,000 in repairs, representing a Band-Aid approach, given that both trucks were purchased in 1988. City Auditor Frank Coppola presented the thinking in choosing purchasing over leasing, while opining that low interests rates made short-term borrowing a reasonable course of action.

What wasn’t reasonable was placing this important piece of business under suspension. While a number of members asked a few thoughtful questions, it would have been a far more in-depth and considered discussion had members been given the time and opportunity to review the request. Given the budget woes of the city, and the School Department’s propensity to overspend each and every year, Council members had to be a little put out by this last-minute request by Mayor Ragucci. While no one could argue the necessity of buying the equipment – it is, after all, a public safety issue -- one can certainly fault the Mayor or Mr. Borgonzi for waiting until the snow was on the ground to address the issue.

The Board of Alderman will take this piece of business up as a part of their regular business Tuesday evening, December 28.

Want Some Cheese With That W(h)ine?

The Board of Aldermen met on Monday evening, December 13, and they had many questions for the Mayor concerning the finances of the City. They are certainly within their rights – indeed, it is their responsibility -- to seek out answers to what they claim are concerns of their constituents during a week when homeowners received real estate tax bills that had increased substantially over the previous year.

The meeting was a fairly even exchange of questions and answers until Alderman Carlo DeMaria took the floor – and suddenly we were watching what was tantamount to a child throwing a temper tantrum. Alderman DeMaria felt that the Mayor was pointing a finger of blame at the Board for the current fiscal restraints that the City is facing. DeMaria was reacting to a response that the Mayor had given to a question posed by Alderman Robert Van Campen concerning the use of the stabilization fund to rehire certain positions that had been laid off two years ago. Mayor Ragucci’s explanation was as follows: the employees that took the biggest hit were in the parks and playground department. The Board Of Aldermen had indicated their desire to go into the stabilization fund to bring these people back. The Mayor said that the message he received from both members of city government and the community was to bring these people back, as well as the services that had been cut at the Shute and Parlin Libraries. Alderman Van Campen seemed to take that answer at face value. Alderman DeMaria took it as a personal affront. “Sometimes I laugh at the things you say,” said DeMaria, with open contempt . . .”It seems like sometimes you throw the blame at us.” DeMaria went on to lament that members of the Board don’t receive information in a timely enough manner in which to study and vote on the issues. His battle cry for the evening, which he repeated several times, was that “we’re part time, we’re not at City Hall every day, we don’t have the same information that you [the Mayor] have.” In fairness to Alderman DeMaria, this has been the sound bite for a number of the members of the Board of Aldermen in recent weeks.

Here’s the rub – yes, technically, being an elected member of the City Council is a “part-time” position. However, when one runs for office, one takes on a very serious obligation to serve the citizens of Everett to the best of his/her ability. That includes attendance at regular meetings and joint conventions, participation in committee meetings, and constituent services. The duties are not limited to showing up at City Hall every other Monday evening. Being an effective elected official requires doing research, thinking outside the box, and not expecting to be spoon fed every scintilla of information.

What was more telling about the comments made by Alderman DeMaria, however, was that he took exception to a legitimate response given to a legitimate question. How childish is it to pitch a fit because you ask a question, but you don’t like the answer – even though the answer was based on fact.

The whining, however, was not limited to Alderman DeMaria. Ward Five Alderman Robert Van Campen also took exception to comments made by a member of the Ragucci administration, Auditor Frank Coppola, and he rose on a “point of personal privilege” to take the Auditor to task. Alderman Van Campen made reference to comments made by that Auditor questioning the motivation for the request for an audit of the School Building Commission. Mr. Coppola made the comment at the Common Council meeting on December 6, and it was reported in the local press. Van Campen expressed his dismay that a “Department Head who is appointed by this Board” would make such a statement. There was something vaguely threatening in Alderman Van Campen’s statement, but aside from that, what was more troubling was the timing of Alderman Van Campen’s public chastisement of the Auditor. Alderman Van Campen chose to rise on his “point of personal privilege” late in the meeting, after the Auditor had left the Council Chamber, where he had stood just one hour before ready to answer any questions that the Board had regarding the city’s financial situation. “I want the City Auditor to know how I feel,” claimed Van Campen, yet he waited until he could take the floor with his criticism with no chance of any face to face interaction with the Auditor. This can hardly be considered professional behavior, particularly by someone who is rumored to have loftier political ambitions.

Rounding out the guest list at Monday evening’s w(h)ine and cheese party was Ward Three Alderman Michael Marchese, who thought that the Common Council should have voted on the request for the School Building Commission audit rather than refer it to the Finance Committee, in spite of the fact that, by his own admission, the Board of Aldermen had failed, up to that point, to provide parameters for the scope of the audit. Alderman Marchese apparently feels that the Council should have accepted on blind faith the whim of the Board of Aldermen in calling for the audit. Alderman Marchese also decried the fact that the Common Council referred the piece of business to the Finance Committee knowing that the year was winding down and that a new Finance Committee would be formed after the first of the year. Perhaps it was the hope of the members of the Common Council that the Finance Committee would actually fulfill its duty and meet at some point next year and have a serious discussion of the subject matter, rather than haphazardly throwing together a piece of business that could be construed as a retaliation for the audit of the School Department that is currently being conducted by the State Auditor’s office.

Here’s the irony of the request for this audit – or any audit – it doesn’t come without a price tag attached to it. The Board of Aldermen spent the better part of two hours at this meeting decrying the real estate tax increases and questioning the close proximity the City is now at relative to the tax levy limit, but they see no problem in requesting an audit of the School Building Commission, with its attending cost to the taxpayer, without providing any concrete rationale or significant guidelines or parameters for it. This from a Board that has spent the last several weeks engaged in significant chest-pounding over the fiscal condition of the City.

It should again be emphasized here that it is the right and the responsibility of the elected members of the Board of Alderman to be the fiscal watchdogs for the citizens of Everett. However – that is not all that this meeting was about. It was also about political positioning, about grandstanding on the eve of what is shaping up to be a very “challenging” election year. The behavior of these three members of the Board as described above does a disservice to their first priority of representing the best interests of the City. Given the fiscal constraints under which cities and towns must now operate, it’s time to put aside hurt feelings and bruised egos and focus on working together as a unit to keep Everett moving forward.

Special Event December 20

The following is a special guest posting provided by Ward 4 Councilman John Leo McKinnon:

Mayor David Ragucci & Councilor John Leo McKinnon cordially invite you to "March in Celebration" in an informal parade onMonday, December 20, 2004, at 6:30 in the evening from the Everett Armory to Everett City Hall in recognition of the Huskies & Eagles' cheerleading victories in the National Cheerleading Competition held in Disney World, Florida.
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S ! ! !

Huskies C Team Cheerleaders -- First Place Pop Warner National Champions

Huskies D Team Cheerleaders -- Second Place Pop Warner National Champions

Eagles Seahawks D Team Cheerleaders -- Third Place Pop Warner National Champions

Light refreshments will be served immediately following the procession in the Mayor's Conference Room located on the third floor of City Hall. Citations will be presented at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chamber.


Thank you.

John Leo McKinnon

To Our Readers

Some of you may have seen in today’s Independent two pieces in which they discuss our blog, The Everett Mirror, and our “sister” blog, everettpolitics.com. While we are very happy to receive recognition of our work, we’re a little troubled at the comments that might mistakenly be attributed to our site. We do not engage, nor do we allow to be posted, the type of character assassinations that have recently appeared on our sister site. While we respect the right of the originators of everettpolitics.com to run their site as they see fit, we at the Everett Mirror hope to stay focused on issues and the performance of our elected and city officials in their capacity as such. The private lives of these people have not been, nor will they ever be, grist for the mill at the Mirror.

Thank you for continuing to visit our site and post your comments.

The Everett Mirror
Campbell, Elizabeth & David

Lights, Camera . . . Election Season 2005!

Many people may know that there is a program on Everett Community Television called Pols & Politics, which is hosted by Ward 2 Alderman Jason Marcus. It’s an entertaining, and occasionally informative program, but the most recent episode was positively illuminating – although probably not in the way that the host and his guest were hoping.

The guest was Ward Three Alderman Michael Marchese, who is rumored to be considering a run for Mayor next year. Alderman Marchese was asked about what things concerned him in the City, and two of the subjects cited are worth noting.

Alderman Marchese stated that he was concerned about the school construction projects, the problems that have been encountered, and the activities of the School Building Commission. He expressed concern over the litigation currently under way over the construction of the Lafayette and the English School and claimed that the Board of Aldermen cannot get any answers from the Administration. He also claimed that the Board is “kept out of the loop” in terms of what the School Building Commission is doing, where the funds are coming from, how the money is being spent, and what the progress is on the school building projects. In a way, these are surprisingly honest statements for an elected official to make. On the other hand . . . one has to wonder why an elected official would have so much difficulty gathering this information when all meetings of the School Building Commission are publicly posted, as required by law, and anyone can attend. The School Building Commission, comprised of very accomplished people who give their time voluntarily, meets on a regular basis, generally on Tuesday evenings. The Commission also has representatives from both the Common Council and the Board of Aldermen sitting as appointed members - liaisons, if you will – so it is difficult to understand why Alderman Marchese would not simply either attend a School Building Commission meeting or speak to his colleague on the Board of Aldermen who is a sitting member of the Commission. Additionally, any expenditure made by the School Building Commission must be signed off by the Joint Committee on Bills & Accounts, on which sit members of both the Board of Aldermen and Common Council, and whose responsibility it is to review all bills submitted before authorizing their payment. The information that the Alderman claims to be seeking is hidden in plain sight.

Another concern of Alderman Marchese is the tax delinquents in the city who are still conducting business in spite of the fact that they owe the city hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes and penalties. He feels that more can be done to collect the money, and although he offered no specifics, he did state that the city shouldn’t be granting licenses to operate these businesses unless their tax issues are resolved. That sounds good on the surface, but what Alderman Marchese fails to point out in this discussion is that the Board of Aldermen is the licensing authority for the city. Alderman Marchese serves on the Board of Aldermen’s Licensing Committee. The irony is staggering.

But for Alderman Marchese’s appearance on Pols & Politics, it could be considered unfair to single him out for disingenuousness when it comes to his criticism of the management of city affairs. For example, in a recent article in the Boston Globe, Ward Five Alderman Robert Van Campen expressed concern that the city is reaching its tax levy limit and makes the claim that the City Council is kept in the dark when it comes to what is happening with the finances of the city. This begs the question – if part of the responsibility of the City Council is to be the “fiscal watchdog” of the City, don’t they have the power to flip the switch and turn the lights back on by, say, actually looking at the finances of the City from time to time? Shouldn’t that be what, for example, the Finance Committee might want to try occasionally?

There are a number of questions that have been posed from the floor of the Council Chamber over the years that could have been researched by the individuals raising the issues. Many of these questions could be referred to committees for further review and information gathering – but as most elected officials know, work on Committees doesn’t generally get your name in the paper, and if you’re considering a run for higher office, increasing name recognition and raising public profile are keys to success, regardless of how clouded the issues become. It is time to demand better of our elected officials, to insist that they put the interests of the city above their political ambitions, and to ask of ourselves more diligence in overseeing the work done by the people we elect to represent us. At the end of the day, the decision is in the hands of the voters – and there are some big decisions soon to come before us. Being an educated participant in the process is going to be crucial when Election Season 2005 rolls around.