Charter Commission Suggestions Take City in Right Direction

February 23, 2011
By

The Everett Charter Review Commission is to be complimented for the hard work and hundreds of hours of thoughtfulness and discussion that it has conducted in the name of charter review – which is the ultimate aim of the commission.

The commission is making suggestions for big changes, which in the end, are for the voters and the voters alone to approve or to deny.

By far the biggest change is going to a unicameral government from a bicameral government.

Then there is the change in the mayor’s term from two years to four years.

Ultimately there will be many, many changes suggested by the Charter Review Commission.

Ultimately, it will take a vote by the voters of this city to approve all the changes or to keep the present charter.

Keeping the present charter as it is would be a mistake. It would also invalidate the great work of the commission, which is trying to lead this city into the future with governmental tools far more effective than what there are today.

The city of Everett will benefit greatly from streamlining its political government.

The four-year term for mayor is another plus as two-year terms for mayor tend to heat up the politics every two years rather than to bring added stability to city hall.

Never before in the modern history of the city has financial and political stability been more important to this city.

The weakened national economy has put a strain on nearly everything local that requires more attention paid to nearly every aspect of city government.

One city council will be enough.

The change will be yours to make. So we urge you to stay informed about suggested Charter Review particulars.

  • Michael_marchese10

    We don’t mind streamling government , but if you do a good job you will be appreciated by the voters and you will run unopposed no free rides if you don’t ! Look at other cities is malden or revere run better at least Mayors are involved in school decisions . This board voted against 4 year term first,then mysteriously voted the other way it is supposed to be an independent group of people ,too many ties to present administration and FORCED to change their vote ,who moved for reconsideration to bring bac k piece for second vote ? Unicarmal in this situation failed miserably NO checks and balances!