NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — The City Council conceded defeat on board and commission appointments last week.

 

The tussle over appointments had begun in January, when the mayor withdrew a nomination to the Airport Commission from the council agenda — and then appointed the person without council approval.

 

The General Government Committee had voted unanimously several weeks ago to keep the various "confirmations," "approvals" and "consents" to boards in the ordinances despite the charter giving that authority to the mayor, but Chair Keith Bona said his further research into the issue did not support the effort. 

 

"So our charter says no council," Bona told his council colleagues last Tuesday. "Our ordinances, the ones in front of us where we're being asked to remove consent, do say consent of council."

 

An opinion from the city solicitor, KP Law, he said, stated the charter supersedes the ordinances and state law. But he found a passage in Massachusetts General Law that says a new government doesn't supersede existing ordinances or bylaws, and that they "shall continue in full force and effect until repealed, modified or superseded."

 

That offered a possibility, he thought, for the council to keep some control but those hopes were dashed as well. 

 

"We took a new charter in 1965 and if we didn't change those ordinances they would still exist," he said. "However, most of these ordinances in front of us that say consent of council came after 1965." 

 

Now it was just a matter of amending the ordinances to remove council consent and bring them into line with MGL, unless the council wanted to appeal to the attorney general.  

 

Councilor Ashley Shade, a member of General Government who had referred a proposal to add council consent over the Airport Commission, reluctantly agreed.

 

"As much as I would like to push back and keep the approval of the city councilors part of this, both our charter and MGL provisions are telling us we can't do that," said Shade. "We have to change the charter to do that." 

 

She stated she would vote to approve Bona's motion to bring the charter into compliance. 

 

Councilor Andrew Fitch asked what would happen if they didn't pass the amendments. Mayor Jennifer Macksey responded that she would continue to confirm appointments on her own. 

 

Fitch described the situation as "icky." "We have two branches of government for a reason, for a check on the other branch," he said. "I feel the council should be a check on the administration's power."

 

Bona pointed out that the council does have some control over the composition of boards and committees. It was also noted that both the Traffic Commission and the Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access (IDEA) Commission have one direct appointment from the council president.

 

"I still disagree but we do have to follow MGL and the charter," said Shade. "I would still like to see our charter eventually changed and fixed."

 

Fitch suggested the council continue to take a vote, "even a ceremonial vote ... on these new appointees. I don't see any reason why we couldn't still do that. That might give us at least a feeling of transparency and celebration of these people and our participation in it."

 

As it stands now, the mayor doesn't have to even put the names forward to the council but has said she would continue to do so. 

 

Council President Bryan Sapienza suggested that the appointees could be sworn in publicly. Shade asked that their names be listed on the agenda, and the mayor said that was up to Sapienza and the city clerk. 

 

The ordinances amendments were passed to a second reading 7-0-1, with Fitch abstaining and Wayne Wilkinson absent. 

 

The council also passed an amended capital outlay plan (or capital improvement plan) ordinance that extends the timing of the six-year plan's presentation up to six months and requires it be submitted to the Planning Board. 

 

"We don't want to have the option that the mayor may or may not want it to go to the Planning Board," said Bona, on language changed from "may" to "shall." "It currently is shall so we want to keep it shall. All the other suggested changes the [General Government] Committee was fine with."

 

Jennifer Barbeau, a former councilor, speaking at hearing of visitors, said the mayor had promised last year to present the CIP the Planning Board and had not. She had also promised to present a plan in her first 100 days, said Barbeau, "It has yet to be provided." 

 

Macksey, later during discussion, said the plan has been presented as part of the budgeting process. 

 

Councilor Lisa Blackmer, also a member of the Planning Board, said that body has not seen a capital plan in years preceding Macksey's election.

 

"It came up at the Planning Board meeting last night," she said, referring to Monday's meeting. "They want not just a presentation, they want active discussion."

 

State law, MGL, Chapter 41, Sec. 81C, gives the Planning Board authority to prepare studies on their municipalities' resources and needs "from time to time" and to report annually to their city council, and this was added to the CIP ordinance. 

 

"Yes, it's a planning document but it's more a financial planning document, and a lot of those documents will be vetted through the planning process as it comes," said Macksey. "I'm certainly open to having that discussion with the chair [of the Planning Board] to fix the ordinance and create a better process."

 

Blackmer questioned why the Finance Committee was listed among the financial officers in the ordinance as assisting the mayor in the preparation of the outlay plan in Sec. 2-124.

 

"We were trying to align the capital improvement document with where it should go," said the mayor. "I have regularly submitted my capital improvement plan through the budget process and we haven't gone in depth to that because its through the budget process."

 

Bona, in a communique to the council, recommended that the timeframe of the plan be extended rather than requiring it be submitted with the budget. 

 

"A comprehensive COP can require a longer preparation period than the annual budget, necessitating comprehensive planning, engineering assessments, and public engagement, which may not always coincide with the annual budget timeline," he wrote. 

 

Blackmer had endorsed that as well at Monday's Planning Board, saying putting forward a plan in the fall made more sense going into the budget season. 

 

She also noted that the reference to 81C is missing from the Planning Board ordinance but Shade asked if they could move this part along and then return to fix other issues.

 

The ordinance passed to a second reading 8-0. 

 

In other business: 

 

• The council approved an order that authorizes the treasurer to file an application with the appropriate state officials to qualify the city's approved debt under state law. 

 

"This tees us up to go before the [Municipal Finance Oversight Board]," Macksey said, for bonding long-term debt that is coming up this fall, describing it as a "standard housekeeping matter." The city's bond counsel, Matthew G. Feher of KP Law, explained that it would provide the city with the state's bond ratings, which should save the city money over the term. The debt will include the Greylock School project and the Hoosic River flood chutes study. 

 

• The council passed 6-2 to a second reading and publication an updated marijuana ordinance that allows for four retail licenses, clarifies the distance from school entrances and retains outdoor grow. The Planning Board had recommended not making any changes in the ordinance related to outdoor cultivation.