Pittsfield's Charter Review Nears Conclusion

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — City officials and a few members of the public had their last chance to add 2 cents Tuesday, as an eight-month review of the city's governing document prepares to draw to a close.

"Thank you all for your service," said Mayor Daniel Bianchi, who appointed the 11-member body in August. "I know it's been a real long affair."

The mayor expressed reservations, though, about whether the recommended document that has emerged will accomplish one of the primary goals for which the process was initiated: To depoliticize the appointment of city department heads and members of boards and commissions.

Under the proposed new charter, the current protocols of City Council approval for mayoral appointments would be replaced with a process by which these appointments are vetted by a special committee of the council that would review the candidates and make a recommendation to the full council.

"It's hopeful that we can create a professional atmosphere, and a professional working group, and hopefully continue to encourage professionals to run for the mayor's office," said Bianchi. "I think to set up a subcommittee like this, I think it would be discouraging."

Bianchi called the prospect of recruiting qualified individuals from the private sector under such circumstances "chilling." Members of the committee said the proposed provision is actually intended to allow candidates to be vetted through a process that might involve somewhat less of a public spotlight.

"We're not trying to create a more arduous or circuitous process," said Brad Gordon. "We're trying to make a better process for people."

"A lot would have to be considered in how that standing committee would operate," said Bianchi. "I could see a highly aggressive subcommittee of the City Council making the process of being able to attract people very difficult."

Renewed calls for a major overhaul of the city's charter document, most of which dates back to 1932, began in earnest in the City Council in spring 2011, in the wake of controversial appointments made by former Mayor James Ruberto. While most mayoral appointments of department heads and board members are typically confirmed without debate, some have provoked disagreement, as has confusion about how long a mayor can fill a position in an "acting" capacity without seeking council approval.  

More recently, one of the first committee appointments of Bianchi's term provoked fierce opposition from some councilors last February, ultimately passing by a 7-4 vote.

Lew Markham, a former city councilor, also voiced concerns about the appointment process and acting positions, citing a half-dozen positions that are currently unfilled or filled by acting directors.  Markham disagreed that scrutiny by the council would be a detriment to hiring qualified personnel.

"Let's say that all those that serve the voters of the city of Pittsfield should be vetted," suggested Markham. "If I'm a professional doing my job, I'm not worried about the process. You're going to approve me. If I'm not doing it, you're not going to approve me.

"I just think it's ridiculous to have someone in power, appointed once forever, without anyone ever judging or evaluating what they do," said Sturgeon.  

Councilor Melissa Mazzeo questioned a provision of the proposed charter that would limit membership of boards and committees to those residing within the bounds of the city.

"It's not easy get a lot of people to sit on these boards. I think making the preference to be giving people who are from Pittsfield the first chance," said Mazzeo, suggesting that a firm restriction might make it difficult to fill the many volunteer bodies involved in municipal government.  

"As a taxpayer in the city of Pittsfield, I think committees should be filled with taxpayers from the city of Pittsfield," opined Sturgeon, in contrast.

Committee Vice Chairman Peter Marchetti estimated that as much as 25 percent of Pittsfield's commissions is currently comprised of persons who reside in nearby towns.  

Councilor Christopher Connell implored the committee to once again examine the possibility of altering the timing of election cycles. Among the most prominent changes in the proposed new charter is the extension of the term of mayor from two years to four, but Connell predicted this may decimate voter turnout for council and School Committee positions on the years in which there is no mayor's race in the municipal election.  

He suggested shifting the cycle to make it occur in the same years as the state elections, tying the voting turnout for local offices to the interest in higher offices, a concept that was previously panned by City Clerk Linda Tyer addressing the committee in December.

"You'd essentially have to have separate poll workers, separate voter lists, separate ballots, separate tallies. It's literally two elections held on the same day," said Tyer at the time, who also indicated it could become a problem as there are instances when a resident may be eligible to vote at a certain location for the local election, but not for state or federal, and this would create further confusion and real-time problems at the polls.

"I'm sure we could work it out," said Connell. "I think you're going to see in three or four years when this starts hitting full cycle, if this all goes through, you're going to see those low turnout numbers.

Following the public hearing, committee Chairman Judge Edward Lapointe decided to schedule one additional meeting for the temporary body next Monday with its hired consultant for final deliberation before voting on the proposed charter document.

The draft constitutes just the committee's recommendation for how the new charter should read, and must be approved of by both the mayor and City Council before being sent on to the state Legislature. If accepted in Boston, the charter will then go on the ballot for voters at an upcoming municipal election.

Pittsfield Community Development OKs Airport Project, Cannabis Amendment