I've kept the campaigning to a minimum here. That's partly intentional, I never wanted to turn this into the Tom show. But I've also been insanely busy with the new one, work and all the other elements of life. No complaints.
So I really haven't addressed why I'd be a good charter commissioner, and that's a fair question to ask. This is a unique race, both for candidates and voters.
How should voters judge the candidates? What's the criteria for a good charter review candidates? And what should the candidates say. Most of the candidates all trying to be non-committal, steering clear of answering any direction questions about what form of government we might favor. It's not that we're hiding anything, rather we just honestly want to keep or options open and let the discussion set the commission's course.
But here are a few things I feel I can offer up:
City Manager vs. Mayor -- As I stated in an earlier post, I'm leaning toward a four-year term for mayor but I'm honestly open to hearing the arguments for something else. If you're basing your decision entirely on my mayoral preference,don't vote for me. I wouldn't want to disappoint.
City Council -- As I suggested at the forum last week, I'd prefer the city council retain some sort of ward representation as that gives voters one councilor dedicated to their interests. But I also see the weakness. An issue in Ward 5--say the landfill--is mostly the concern of that councilor and those voters. The rest of the councilors aren't dependent on those votes to retain their seat so they can care a little less or not at all. I'd like to explore a system that gives voters in any ward an even stronger voice in selecting more than one city councilor so as a city we might follow the lead and care a little more about problems that aren't our own. I'm not certain such a system exists, but it's worth exploring.
Other boards--I brought this up a long time ago, but I'd also like to investigate the possibility of making some of the seats on key city boards elected positions. I'm not entirely satisfied with the mayor having total appointing power (should say total nominating power with city council approval, just would like to have some board members not need to pass over the mayor's desk.)
So those are the issues. Now, as to my qualifications: As a news reporter I've covered municipal government from Cape Cod (where this city boy first heard the terms, Town Manager and Selectman) to the North Shore. Hell, I covered the Statehouse and Boston City Hall while I was still in college (no pay, mind you, but I did get clips.) I love tracking municipal government, which is one reason I started this blog.
I really think this passion coupled with my research and reporting skills would serve the commission well. I hope you think so too.
Note: I appreciate the support from commenters but I'm going to shut off comments on this one. I'd hate for this post to turn into something that might hinder the commission's work going foward if I'm lucky enough to be elected. The two comments I've received have been very polite, very civil, and very kind, thanks for that. But I'd regret it if a potential future fellow commissioner took offense at an off-hand remark made so close to the election. I have no designs on impacting other campaigns, just my own. Thanks.
