• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
    • About
    • Board of Directors
    • LWV Mission Statement
    • Bylaws of the LWVN
    • LWVN Non-Partisan Policy
    • LWVN Diversity Policy
    • LWVN Handbook
    • Annual Meetings
    • Newton League Past Presidents
    • Jane Leighton Volunteer-of-the-Year Award
    • LWVN Scholarship Program
  • News and Events
    • News & Events
    • The League Presents…
    • Newsletters
  • New Member FAQ
  • Contact Us
LWV Newton logo
  • Facebook

Visit us on Facebook!

  • Learn
    • Learn
    • The League Presents…
    • Topic Meetings
    • Newton Civics Challenge
  • Act/Advocate
    • Act/Advocate
    • LWVN Positions and Program
    • Issues We Are Following
    • LWVN Observer Corps
    • LWVN Local Action Log
    • Consensus Studies
    • National and State Positions
  • Vote
    • Vote
    • How to Register to Vote
    • How to Pick a Candidate
    • How, When and Where to Vote
    • Massachusetts Voters Bill of Rights
    • Your Elected Officials
    • Tips for Contacting Elected Officials

7-12-16 Charter Commission Observer Notes

July 20, 2016

7-12-16 Charter Commission Meeting Observer Notes

Charter Commission Meeting

July 12, 2016

Attending: Josh Krintzman (Chair), Bryan Barash (late), Jane Frantz, Howard Haywood, Anne Larner, Brooke Lipsitt, Karen Manning, Rhanna Kidwell, Christopher Steele

Approval of Minutes: Approval of May 11, 18, 25 and June 15 minutes (minor modifications)

Public Comments:

Earnest Lowenstein: Wants clarification on Article 11 General Provisions where it requires provision for public comment at reasonable intervals so he can oppose it.

Matt Hills: Supports the School Committee’s current 8-year term limit structure. There is no magic way to create competition and turnover. The current system gives infrequent strong spurts of competition in electoral races. It’s more difficult to get turnover if the list is longer. Good people step up when there’s an open seat. Stronger candidates don’t run against an incumbent.

Article 5: Financial Procedures—

BL: 5b: do we want that level of detail? Are we discouraging thinking of items not on that list?

AL: thinks is helpful and consistent

(Barash arrives at 7:15)

CS: doesn’t read as definitive, but as minimum threshold

BB: proposes changing “may” to “shall”

JK: thinks too detailed.

RK: likes list

BB: is anyone concerned that the city council won’t include these things?

JF: yes

Vote on shorter second sentence fails (JK, BL, BB—yes, CS-abstain)

Vote on longer sentence carries 8-0 (HH abstains)

Sec. 5b Capital Inventory and Capital Improvement Program:

Changed “may” to “Shall and “describe” to “establish” in the second sentence: “The city council shall, by ordinance, establish the requirements of the inventory, such as age, maintenance and repair history, remaining useful life and other features the city council deems appropriate.”

Straw Vote: 9-0

Article 6

BB & AL: Still have meetings to complete. Not ready to discuss.

HELD

Term Limits

JK provided everyone with a discussion guide that started with the commission’s goals

  • Greater public participation in government in Newton
  • Increased level of civic understanding
  • More effective and responsive government

The cc then addressed the following questions:

  • How does the concept of term limits comport or conflict with the above goals?
    1. What issues or problems will term limits solve or address?
    2. What are the downsides to term limits and what problems could they create?

RK: 15% turnover in any election of council, much less than ideal, declining marginal return on tenure, not getting greater participation. Wants systematic—limits for one/limits for all

BB: but not all about return on investment—it’s about who people like and want representing them.

AL: term limits on SC has meant greater turnover—about 30%. Been successful there. CC—seeing longer and longer tenure, lower turnover—15% there. Low rate of challengers. Fewer open seats—average 9.3%. Literature on term limits mostly about “turn the crooks out” That’s not how she sees Newton. Here it’s mostly about not making a career of public office and maximizing public involvement. Usually the mayor and cc have the same limits in other communities.

BL: agrees with goal of turnover. Not sure of the connection between term limits and turnover. We are seeing a dearth of people with the capacity to run for office—concerned that by adding term limits only going to discourage people from service.

KM: disagree. Many entrepreneurs with flexible schedules now. Streamlining the public process makes it more attractive. Can campaign more easily with social media and such. Power of incumbency is the problem. People wait for vacancies. SC shows how it can play out.

BB: reasons not to run against incumbents is they are neighbors. Haven’t seen seats go vacant in Newton.

BL: have had difficulty getting people to run.

CS: There are easy & difficult campaigns. Those looking to run wait for an easy election. Without limits, you don’t have that and might instead just run, rather than wait. My concerns are if you have a different vision, but won’t run for fear of alienating the current office holder—where’s the leadership? Term limits won’t guarantee good candidates will run.

JF: strongly supports term limits. TL help focus work because only have a set number of years to accomplish anything.

JK: thinks open seats are the best way to get a contested race

KM: few seats turn over via challenge.

(others recalled ½ of school committee being voted out in the 1970s because of hot issues)

JK summarized pros and cons of TL:

More open seats People wait to run
Shorter tenure Shorter tenure
Focus People see limit as their full term, rather than about accomplishing something
No lifetime careers in public office Change power relationship with staff
  Difficulty finding people to run

 

AL: ½ of city council has been in office for 10 years or more

BL: most other communities don’t term limit city council. Very few limit school committee. And other communities have contested elections all the time. It’s not a magic fix.

HH: Ward 3 has issues finding people to run

  • Should term limits for city council, school committee and mayor be interrelated/aligned or should they be addressed individually?
    1. What are the advantages/benefits of having an interrelated system of term limits for the city council, school committee and mayor?
    2. What are the disadvantages of same?

RK: create a power imbalance if council is limited and mayor not

Discussion of mayor’s role on SC and how that is different

HH: with a strong mayor system you inherently have imbalance power. TL would not fix that

BL: could exacerbate the imbalance. A lot of council’s work is built on relationships with staff and city departments. If frequent turnover, imbalance gets worse. Had a mayor for 24 years, who was challenged every time.

BB: Mayors can wait out council

JK: could be an issue of balance of power. Mayoral races get regular challengers, unlike council.

BB: keep in mind fresh ideas if tl mayor

JF: name recognition trumps all in mayoral races

AL: large cities with tl for mayors & councils tend to have the same length of tl. Most 8 or 12 years.

  1. If term limits are equitable—must they be equal?
  • Addressing the term limits as separate entities
    1. What are the tradeoffs/downsides to addressing the term limits for the three bodies as separate entities?
    2. What are the advantages/benefits of same?

KM: can be different. Easy to understand

JF: each role is so different, would want to assess differently.

BB: equal makes easier for voters to understand. Only reason for it

BL: think about tl timing. Mayors often come out of the council. Want to avoid a large number of tl out councilors at same time mayor is tl out. Turnover all at the same time feels peculiar

AL: in SC never lost whole body at same time. Had up to 6 SC turn over, but not all due to tl.

Collins: Most places start the clock at zero. Transitions are up to the charter

  • Term limits for mayor
  • TL for School Committee
  • TL for City Council

AL: 12-year limit is at the outer realm of other cities’ limits

HH If tl for mayor and not council will have council with more power

RK: favors 12 for council and mayor

JF: 12 for mayor fine. Third term is often the killer. Council 12 years gives enough time to dig into an issue and make progress. 12-14 not more. SC—the system works now. Talking about the system. Too much institutional knowledge—leaving out a large part of the elementary school population. Likes 8 years because many SC members do know the system going in. Get up to speed faster than the average councilor

BB: power associated with mayoral incumbency…

JK: concerns about tl mayor. Plenty of attention to the race now. Don’t have the same issue at council. Getting contested elections for mayor.

BL: we are here for two things:

  1. Address the questions put to us by the pubic
  2. Create internal logic and consistency/function to the charter

Concerned that system would enhance imbalance of power between mayor & council.

BB: agree. Best to TL both

Proposed: 12-12-12 or 12-12-8 (SC)

KM: 16?

RK: data on other cities—same limits

KM: too dramatic a change?

BL: the public message will be Term Limits for All. Thinks council of 13 will do the job (having more contested races). This is a huge change. TL to council or mayor is puzzling.

HH&BB: No TL for anyone or TL for everyone

VOTE: 12-12-12 limits, fails 3-5

16 year mayoral term limit: fails 4-4-1

Decide to vote SC and council first

In favor of 12-year term limits for City Council: Frantz, Manning, Larner, Kidwell, Haywood. Opposed: Barash, Lipsitt, Krintzman, Steele

 

JF: wants shorter TL for SC—innovation needs new ideas. Need elementary school representation—when those parents aren’t on the committee, these schools get left out of discussions.

AL: SC should reflect the community, not just the school population. 8 years is now not a problem. NO magic number

JF: cc&SC have different roles. We have never lacked community members on SC. Run into problems when the school community is not fully represented. 8 years has worked. Why change it?

KL: there was no push to change this.

VOTE on 12-year TL for SC, fails 2(Kidwell, Larner)-6-1 (Haywood)

In favor of 8-year term limits for School Committee: Frantz, Manning, Krintzman, Haywood, Barash.  Opposed: Kidwell, Larner, Lipsitt, Steele

In favor of 12-year term limits for mayor: Frantz, Manning, Barash, Larner, Kidwell. Opposed: Haywood, Lipsitt, Krintzman, Steele

BL: We’ve now had three 5-4 votes. Troubling because it doesn’t bode well for the charter.

JF: We’ve gotten the most flak for a 9-0 decision.

Vote on whole package—passes 5-4: Opposed: Lipsitt, Krintzman, Haywood, Steele

Final report—

JK wanted volunteers to work over the summer

Preliminary report—usually just the charter because it’s published in the paper (expensive) supplementary materials can go on the web.

JK—wants an intro and wants materials summarized

RK: worried won’t finish on time—still have Article 6, Area Council discussion, composition of city council and two further articles. Fall is full of holidays

BL: august meeting?

Summer work: get notes and summaries together, explain process

RK: volunteers, but can’t do over the summer.

Agreement that need a separate list of recommendations on things not addressed in the charter. Report should be short & focused—a sales pitch for the charter.

KM leaves at 9:50

HH; Need to make the case for cutting the council to 13 members

Meeting adjourned at 10.

Submitted by Andreae Downs.

Categories: Charter Commission, Local Action Log, Observer Notes

Primary Sidebar

Support LWVN

Join/Renew
Donate

Election Info

The State Primary is Tuesday, September 6.  Don't forget to VOTE!

  • Register to vote
  • How to Vote
  • Find your polling location
  • Absentee Ballots

Upcoming Events

  • There are no upcoming events.

2021 LWVN Member Handbook

An electronic version LWVN Member Handbook is now available.  Expect an updated handbook for 2022-23 in the late Fall.

LWV Mass. & US

LWV MA LWV US

Watch “The League Presents…”

The League Presents... is a monthly program on NewTV produced and directed by LWVN members about issues important to our community.

  • The League Presents: A conversation with Carol Moore, Newton’s City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council
  • The League Presents: Zoning Redesign, part 1
  • The League Presents: Newton’s Citizens Commission on Energy
  • The League Presents: What it means to be a League of Women Voters member
  • The League Presents: A Conversation with Three New School Committee Members

All past programs

Take Action & Contact Your Legislators

  • Support An Act Promoting Community Immunity
  • Support Public Health Measures 
  • Support Racial and Gender Parity
  • Take Action on the Votes Act
  • Potential Cuts to MBTA Service

Posts by Category

  • VOTE – Voters Service
    • Elections
    • Candidate Forums
    • Voter Registration
  • LEARN – Topics of Interest
    • Charter Commission
    • Community Preservation
    • Education
    • Environmental Issues
    • Housing
    • Land Use
    • Municipal Finance
    • Transportation
    • Women’s Suffrage
  • ACT – Action & Advocacy
    • Local Action Log
    • Consensus Studies – MA
    • Consensus Studies – Newton
    • Consensus Studies – US
  • City of Newton Info
    • City Council Meetings: Docket Digest
    • Observer Notes

Facebook Posts

Ellen Auerbach Grody
Ellen Auerbach Grody

June 28th, 11:33 am

Thank you for the recent letter to the mayor:LWVN Board Concurs with Newton Citizens Commission on Energy’s Memo Rejecting Newton Cemetery’s Tree Removal RequestJune 24, 2022On June 24, 2022, LWVN sent an email to Mayor Fuller expressing our our agreement with the Newton Citizens Commission on Energy (NCCE)’s memo of June 20th stating “We are writing to you regarding the Newton Cemetery’ request for exemption from the Tree Preservation Ordinance. We urge you to stand with the Director of Urban Forestry in denying that request and any waiver of its consequences. We also urge you to ask the City Council to revise the ordinance language to clarify their intent that the Tree Preservation Ordinance not exclude any property owners from its provisions.” ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook
· Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email

League of Women Voters of Newton, MA
League of Women Voters of Newton, MA

June 22nd, 6:26 pm

Breaking News: Governor Baker Signs VOTES Act Into Law - https://mailchi.mp/56363aee24bf/votes_act_update-8901645 ... See MoreSee Less

Breaking News: Governor Baker Signs VOTES Act Into Law

mailchi.mp

View on Facebook
· Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email

League of Women Voters of Newton, MA
League of Women Voters of Newton, MA

June 21st, 11:26 am

Newton Public Facilities Meeting: New Pipelines and Gas Valve Safety - https://mailchi.mp/ceafe522986a/newton-public-facilities-meeting-new-pipelines-and-gas-valve-safety ... See MoreSee Less

Newton Public Facilities Meeting: New Pipelines and Gas Valve Safety

mailchi.mp

View on Facebook
· Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email

League of Women Voters of Newton, MA
League of Women Voters of Newton, MA

June 13th, 10:33 am

LWVN has launched an important new "Municipal Transparency and Accountability Initiative". Learn more here!: https://lwvnewton.org/2022/06/… ... See MoreSee Less

Municipal Transparency and Accountability Initiative: Mission Statement and Goals - League of Women Voters Newton

lwvnewton.org

Throughout its 102-year history, the League of Women Voters has been a vigorous advocate for transparent and accountable government. The League strongly believes that transparency and accountability i...
View on Facebook
· Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email

League of Women Voters of Newton, MA
League of Women Voters of Newton, MA

June 9th, 10:12 am

Important Update: VOTES ACT Released from Conference Committee - https://mailchi.mp/6365b29fa297/votes_act_update ... See MoreSee Less

Important Update: VOTES ACT Released from Conference Committee

mailchi.mp

Boston, MA — The Massachusetts VOTES Act Conference Committee today released its version of the comprehensive election reform bill, which will now head to the House and Senate for final procedural...
View on Facebook
· Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email

The League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan political organization encouraging the informed and active participation of citizens in government. It influences public policy through education and advocacy.

© 2022 League of Women Voters® Newton | P.O. Box 610207, Newton, MA 02461 | info@lwvnewton.org

Site by Tech-Tamer | Log in