Though the Somerville City Council ultimately approved next year’s $380.1 million budget without line item removals Thursday, a yearslong spat between the executive and legislative branches of government – the mayor and council – was on full display in chambers, this time centering around a single line item.
Mayor Katjana Ballantyne defended continued funding for a chief administrative officer position that the council recommended removing without deliberation on June 24. Before voting down the motion, councilors deliberated with each other and pushed back against the assertions in her speech, with reactions ranging from displeasure and disappointment in and feelings of disrespect from the mayor. At least two councilors scoffed at the mayor’s claim of having an open-door policy.
Councilor J.T. Scott, who sponsored the order to remove funding, said in response to the mayor’s words, “the disrespect that was just expressed is corrosive” and is disrespectful to “the idea of the legislative branch and its responsibilities in its entirety.” He reflected how important it is to have separate branches of government working independently and why this funding issue should remain a debate between the legislators.
All budget items were approved shortly thereafter, including $8 million additional dollars for the school department, climate-forward strategies like a curbside composting pilot, funding for up to 1,000 units of affordable housing and establishing the Armory as the city’s publicly owned art center. The fiscal year begins July 1.
Charter review implications
The CAO position, responsible for day-to-day oversight of the city and union negotiations, reports to the mayor and was subject to lengthy discussion in 2024. More recently, it is part of the city’s effort at charter reform, which is debating whether to allow two referendum questions about it and mayoral term limits this fall. The finalization of the charter review this spring did not occur without slowdowns. Some councilors suggested the mayor held up the process to get an eventual four-year term for the position into the proposal; Scott invoked a charter right to delay a vote in late April.
Ballantyne and councilor Jake Wilson were on Beacon Hill this week advocating for the acceptance of charter reform.
Currently, the CAO role is appropriated as a line item but the future position, if approved, would need approval by city council.
Ballantyne expressed concern about the current employee who would lose their job and that not funding this “previously accepted” position would “potentially legally ignore the legal requirements” of the new city charter, if it becomes law.
Wilson said Thursday that he did not “want to see us take any action here that gives Beacon Hill any reason to not approve that home rule petition that we spent so much time on.” He hoped state representatives were “not paying attention to what’s going on around here,” he said, while asking his colleagues “to put emotion aside on this.”
“Unacceptable.” “Disrespect.”
In addressing a “surprise dismissal” of current CAO Vargas, Ballantyne said she worried councilors “may have acted without full information or sufficient deliberation” in recommending the funding cut. That, she said, “makes it harder for us to keep and attract the quality staff our community relies on.” Furthermore, Ballantyne remarked how the city was “see-sawing” while a “hostile federal administration” threatened, noting Vargas stood behind her with “personal risk” to support the city’s immigrant-friendly sanctuary city policies and constitutional rights.
Council vice president Lance Davis was the first councilor to speak in rebuttal, saying it was “unacceptable” and “disappointing” that the mayor was making this about a single person. “This is not about an individual … the council’s vote is to cut dollars from the budget. That is one of the only powers we have as councilors.” Davis furthered that he personally “never felt that this position was appropriate or necessary … it is the mayor herself who is making it about an individual and that is really, really, really unfortunate.”
Open-door policy
In some of her final comments to the council, Ballantyne said, “my door is always open” if councilors feel like there is a lack of understanding into what any city position does. “You are always welcome to come and talk and deliberate with me.”
Councilor Matt McLaughlin, while having no objection to seeing the CAO position, did object to this. “The issue is that there isn’t an open door policy,” McLaughlin said. “The door is clearly closed. There’s a glass door now instead of a wooden door, but the door is not open.” Councilor Will Mbah had voted to remove the line item earlier in the week, describing how his concerns had been treated tersely by Vargas, drawing a short text instead of a hoped-for conversation. He changed his vote Thursday thinking to “let this position slide through,” he said, for “the sake of passage of the city charter.”
In the end, before the whole budget passed, McLaughlin remarked he was happy to see finances that “still reflects our values,” in light of the “dark times” the city is experiencing.
Impact on morale
Though personnel budgeting cuts are within the council’s power, Councilor Ewen-Campen said any needs to be done “with the seriousness it deserves,” and he’d heard from city officials about the effect cuts like these have on them “psychologically and on morale level.”
President Judy Pineda Neufeld, who expects to leave office Monday and is not running for reelection, called out “the fear, the anxiety, the pit in their stomach” that city employees feel during budget season. She urged fellow councilors to watch their “tone and tenor” and said it’s the role of the council to ask questions and get answers during budget season.
“I’m struggling to believe that this isn’t personal, and I’m asking you to think about the city staff who are watching, who are wondering if they’re next,” she said. Some audience members applauded her final remarks.
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.