When it comes to its vote last week to allow for the mayoral form of government to be placed before the voters on the November 2016 ballot, the East Providence City Council needs to take a time out, call the booth for a review, ask for a do-over or …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Register to post eventsIf you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here. Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content. |
Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.
When it comes to its vote last week to allow for the mayoral form of government to be placed before the voters on the November 2016 ballot, the East Providence City Council needs to take a time out, call the booth for a review, ask for a do-over or whatever analogy works for the majority of the body.
The manner in which the initiative will be presented to the voters is too simplistic to give this very serious topic its due justice. As written in the meeting agenda for the October 8, 2015 and stated later during what was an egregiously brief discussion on the matter, the current term of "city manager" will simply be replaced with the term "mayor."
That's it, save for creating a two-year term of office.
There was no mention of a recall provision, the salary the newly-elected mayor would receive, the composition of the administration including a chief of staff or a myriad of any other potential changes necessitated from the switch in governmental form.
In addition, the entire Council was not present for last week's vote. At-Large Councilwoman Tracy Capobianco was absent. There's a chance her voice may have brought something pertinent to the discussion.
What the Council should and needs to do is make a motion to reconsider under "Robert's Rules of Order," the guideline for procedures used in most governmental meetings.
According to those rules, a member of the Council who was in attendance at the meeting in which the vote took place can ask the subject be brought back up for discussion with the possibility another action can be taken. It can be tabled for future study or rescinded outright or left as is.
The Council, instead, should vote to set up a Charter Review Commission for a comprehensive look at how we do the people's business in East Providence, including the feasibility of an elected mayor form.
The voters, as supporters of the mayoral structure would say, deserve to once and for all vote on this matter. They just shouldn't do it without knowing exactly what they are voting for in the long run.