Pittsfield Panel Proposes Safeguards from Charter Objection
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Charter Review Committee has made suggestions that they hope will prevent charter objections from crippling agenda items.
This especially applies to the budget process, as it caused unrest two years ago when a former councilor charter objected in the 11th hour.
"We don't want a charter objection involving the budget process at all once it's moving because any delay can throw everything off," Chair Michael McCarthy said.
The committee will propose amendments to Article 2 Section 9C, Charter Objection, to allow for discussion, require three supporters, and be prohibited when it pertains to the proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
The motion became a prominent tactic during the budget hearings last year when Ward 2 Councilor Charles Kronick called a charter objection on the $189 million fiscal 2023 budget and derailed the vote. Because of this, a budget was adopted by default but former mayor Linda Tyer agreed to apply $116,000 in recommended increases from the council after the matter.
During a press conference, Tyer said the charter objection caused "manufactured chaos" and (then council president) Peter Marchetti described it as "very reckless."
Kronick caused unrest again the next year when he motioned a charter objection against waiving a Finance Committee review for three time-sensitive orders.
"The biggest issue, which I think was the issue that caused us to really get together, is the charter objection," McCarthy said.
The committee began work in late 2022 to refine the city's 26-chapter code.
In the fall of 2023, President Pete White (former vice-president) presented the committee with a petition that asked "Should the charter objection be eliminated or otherwise amended?"
Under the current city code, if a single city council member objects to the taking of the vote, it is postponed until the next meeting along with discussion.
Ward 6 Councilor Dina Lampiasi is in her third term and explained that the charter objection was predominately an issue in the last term. She explained that it doesn't allow individuals who came to the meeting for a topic to be engaged and is frustrating when the conversation abruptly ends.
"I think it left many feeling disheartened by the process of government and our ability to get work done," she said.
"For those reasons, I'm favorable of making some changes to the charter objection. I do believe that it's an important tool but we need some guardrails to make sure that it's used responsibly in the future."
The committee did not formally vote on the amendments because they are approving all amended sections as a whole when completed.
The current code governing the charter objection reads:
"On the first occasion that the question on adoption of a measure is put to the city council, if a single member present objects to the taking of the vote, the vote shall be postponed until the next meeting of the city council, whether regular or special. If two members present object, such postponement shall be until the next regular meeting. If it is an emergency measure at least four members must object. This procedure shall not be used more than once for any specific matter notwithstanding an amendment to the original matter. A charter objection shall have privilege over all motions but must be raised prior to or at the call for a vote by the presiding officer and all debate shall cease."
The proposed amendment stipulates that the charter objection is to be made by motion and second and will stop any vote on the item at the meeting but will not stop further discussion and testimony.
It also stipulates that the objection must be supported by at least three present members and will not be entertained if it pertains to the proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
Tags: charter objection,
