Tags: | | | | | | |

A strongly worded letter released this morning and signed by seven city councilors, including the two mayoral candidates, opposes the Home Rule Petition that is docketed by another 14 candidates. This suggests that even if the petition passes the city council, it may run into trouble with the new mayor, no matter who the city elects.

October 2, 2017 NEWTON, MA – Last Monday, 14 of our colleagues docketed a measure to reduce the city council from 24 to 16 members. This is a separate proposal from the charter commission’s, and it would only proceed if the people rejected the charter commission’s proposal on Election Day. As a Home Rule petition, it would require approval of the city council, mayor, and state legislature.


We oppose this measure. It was put forward without analysis or public comment and it muddies the waters ahead of Election Day. Voters deserve a clear choice on the charter commission’s reforms, which are the product of two years of public input and careful deliberation and which go far beyond reducing the size of the city council.


Irrespective of whether we support or oppose the charter commission’s proposal, this measure confuses public deliberation and undermines the integrity of the city council.


We urge our constituents – on both sides of the issue – to provide public comment at City Hall at 8PM on Wednesday, October 4th. 


The city council should stay out of the way and let the voters have their say.



Susan Albright

Jake Auchincloss

Deb Crossley

Ruthanne Fuller

Ted Hess-Mahan

Alison Leary

Scott Lennon


What’s interesting to me is that the letter doesn’t oppose the petition on the merits, but the process by which it has been handled. The opposing comments here on Village 14 tend to lean the same way. 

Signers are Councilors Susan Albright, Jake Auchincloss, Deb Crossley, Ruthanne Fuller, Ted Hess-Mahan, Alison Leary and Scott Lennon.