Even though it's quite probable that the majority of Melrosians would vote to remove the mayor from the School Committee, only Monica, Scott and Don attempted to move that forward in this week's BOA mtg of which I had the misfortune of watching a re-run (a revolting $hitshow). The rest of them decided that their political alliances with the Executive Branch mattered more than what the citizens should have a chance to vote on or what makes common sense based on 15 years of evidence (the mayor on the SC has been a huge mistake, proven by many actual facts).
full copy of proposed changes to City Charter & votes/recommendations to date, along with letters from citizens:
This is what happens when the public sits silent and allows politicians to run amock fulfilling their patronage obligations instead of holding true to their oaths of office, as they do here.
It's way past time to stand up and fight back. Write to the media, call the BOA, show up (especially as the Appropriations Committee sends the proposed Charter changes onto full board). Read the meeting packets, as tedious and odious as they often are. Understand the issues better yourselves. Withhold funds from candidates and tell them why. Write checks to those who will promise to do the right things. Contact all of the candidates and let them know what the issues ACTUALLY ARE instead of allowing the BOA and SC (and RD) to frame them for the citizens as they want them to be seen. Public pressure (and fear of failure, which she's already experienced, having lost a SC election once before) already led to the withdrawal of one BOA at large member from running again.
26 Albion St
Wakefield, MA 01880
75 Sylvan Street, C 105, Danvers, MA 01923
Melrose Free Press Facebook Page, Community Page
These elected members (almost all) are officially rogue and not in line with the citizens or common sense. Jessica Buster nails it, as do several others who spoke. Driscoll (speaking as citizen--ya sure) is even more offensive than usual, as are most of the BOA members voting for their protected status and basically to give the mayor EVEN more power than the inordinate amount he already abuses. Why would anyone give Driscoll or Thorp (who got a key position on the Charter Review Position) the time of day, let alone more power, after the horrendous and very expensive messes they've directly caused and continue to cause? Why would the BOA vote to actively keep the public out of the charter review (simple, actually, they think they know what's best and they don't actually want to hear from the public, with their pesky "negativity" and opinions that contradict their political patronage status).
This BOA has proven itself to be as much of an abomination as the SC. Watch Mortimer boorishly shut down the head of the WC try to correct a false statement while the rest of the boobs just sit there and let him bully her. So much for MAAV and their hollow messages about bullying and bystanders! So much for the pretense of a Human Rights Commission, as their voice remains absent 100% of the time when it counts. They should all be ashamed, if they even had a conscience capable of shaming. This city's local governance has become a mockery of itself, bearing much more in common with all that it is shameful in the Trump mode than most would probably care to admit. While it clings to its quaint and utterly provincial, backwards self-image, it has in fact become corrupt and rotten to its very core.
One of the most regressive changes has not been the subject of news, and it should be:
The opening clause of Section 10-6 would replace the requirement of ratification by voters of Melrose with the approval of the Legislature (so the voters would no longer have the final say over charter changes; instead the Legislature would).
That is a fatal change, one that is injurious to good government in an progressive sense of the term.
It's time to shed abundant light on this one, folks, because it's perhaps the most insidious change of all.
That that change could be approved by the BOA by an 8-0 vote is stunning. It's as if they failed reading comprehension.