The packet for Monday’s meeting of Chelsea’s Charter Review Committee holds the first full draft of new language for Part II of the city charter, the section that governs the City Council. It was submitted by committee chair and Council President Roberto Jimenez-Rivera. Among its changes: spending orders would need eight council votes instead of six, the council could require the city manager to appear in person, and councilors would be barred from the city’s health and life insurance.
The committee meets Monday, November 9, at 7 p.m. in City Council Committee Room 305 at City Hall, 500 Broadway. The agenda lists a review of purpose and process, public comment and the review of Part II. We previewed the agenda earlier this week; the 14-page packet was posted Wednesday.
Votes needed to pass spending
The current charter sets a quorum at a majority of the full council and requires a majority of the full council, six of 11, to adopt an appropriation order. A loan authorization takes two-thirds, or eight. The draft sets a quorum of six and requires eight members, by roll call, to adopt an appropriation order or a loan authorization. Ordinances would need six votes; today most measures pass by a majority of those present.
The packet’s summary describes this section as stating the thresholds “in simpler language.” For loans the number stays at eight. For appropriations, it rises from six to eight.
Calling the city manager
The current charter lets the council require any officer or employee to appear on 48 hours’ written notice. The draft adds a section on the city manager: the council could require the manager to provide specific information and to appear before it in person, bringing any staff the manager chooses. Notice would rise to at least seven days, and the questions would have to be sent in advance and in writing. No one called could be required to answer questions not related to the ones sent.
The draft also adds what the summary calls an interference with administration clause, standard in council-manager charters: neither the council nor any member could give orders to city officers or employees. As written in the packet, the clause refers to employees “appointed by the mayor.” Chelsea has had a city manager, not a mayor, since its current charter took effect.
Other changes in the draft
- School Committee seat. The council would no longer elect one of its members as a nonvoting member of the School Committee.
- District councilors who move. Today a district councilor who moves out of the district vacates the seat. Under the draft, the seat would be vacant only if the move comes in the first 18 months of the two-year term; a councilor who moves in the last six months and still lives in Chelsea could finish the term. A councilor drawn out of a district by new lines could also finish the term.
- Vacancies. A seat would not be filled if a city election is within 90 days, instead of 180. Someone appointed to fill a seat could not be listed as a “candidate for re-election” on the ballot.
- Council president. One-year term, elected at the first meeting in January, appoints all committees and is the official head of the city for ceremonial purposes.
- Open meetings. Every council committee and subcommittee would be open to the public unless the law provides otherwise, with agendas posted 48 hours ahead. Executive session minutes would be released once publishing them would not defeat the purpose of the session.
- Staff. A clerk of committees, which the summary describes as a re-established position, with three-year terms for both clerks, a requirement that city officials cooperate with council staff, and supervision of council staff by the president.
- One-night votes. Measures other than ordinances, appropriations and loan authorizations could pass at a single meeting unless a member objects.
- Pay and benefits. Councilors would remain eligible for the retirement system but could not join the city’s group health or life insurance, and could be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses under rules the council writes. Raises would still take effect only after the next election.
- Spelling. “Councillor” would become “councilor” throughout.
The felony rule returns
The packet also brings back a proposal tabled at the committee’s last meeting from members Kelly Zimmerhanzel and Karla Alvarado. The charter now bars anyone finally convicted of any state or federal felony from running for or holding any city office or position. The packet offers three replacements:
- Proposal 1: bar only those convicted of a criminal offense involving misconduct in a public office, trust or job, and remove any official so convicted.
- Proposal 2: bar those convicted of a state or federal crime involving moral turpitude.
- Proposal 3: bar those convicted of an offense against a child or of misconduct in public office, and remove any official so convicted.
Jimenez-Rivera’s draft of Part II keeps the current all-felony language in its section on prohibitions.
What happens next
Under the rules the committee adopted in August, a change needs six of the nine members to go to the City Council as a recommendation. The council then decides what to send to the Legislature as a home rule petition. Public comment opens each meeting, two minutes per speaker, in person only. The packet is on the City Council’s agendas and minutes page on the city website.