On May 26, Mayor Marc Laredo responded to five FY27 Budget resolutions submitted by the City Council. The City Council reviewed those responses, submitted a sixth resolution, and ultimately voted to approve the $668,336,666 budget by a vote of 22-2.
As explained here, the City Council’s amendment powers are limited, as its budget resolutions are requests that the Mayor may or may not act upon.
Mayor’s response to budget resolutions
The Mayor responded to each of the FY27 Budget resolutions, and the City Council discussed each.
Resolution No. 1: ADA Coordinator Position
The Administration agreed to move the ADA Coordinator position from the Law Department to the Health & Human Services (HHS) Department as a full-time role, as requested in the resolution. There was some discussion about adjustments to salary, as the position in the Mayor’s original budget was higher than the amount that would be transferred for the Health and Human Services Department. The Mayor explained that the requirement for a law degree had increased the salary for that position and clarified that the amount did not include benefits, which would be added later in the year through the Comptroller’s office. The transfer and related budget adjustments were approved unanimously.
Resolution No. 2: Planning Department and Economic Development
One of the most significant discussions centered on whether the Planning Department has sufficient staffing and expertise to support Newton’s long-term economic growth. Councilors expressed concerns about vacancies in leadership positions, including Planning Director and Deputy Chief Planner, and delays in posting those positions; whether Newton is investing enough in strategic planning and commercial tax-base growth; and the need for a broader city-wide vision for economic development.
Councilors Roche, Dahmubed, and Albright were the most vocal about the Administration’s response. Roche argued that the City is facing enormous structural challenges to maintaining a fiscally robust Newton. He said that while we have a dedicated team looking at existing opportunities and maximizing our revenue growth, there are other things that we need to do to attract new businesses and make regulatory changes, and those need a separate body of work that requires specialized knowledge and training, which the current department does not have. He argued that while the new Planning Director should shape the team, the Council is in the process of reviewing the budget and “this Planning Department budget does not appear sufficient to face the challenges we have.” He also cited neighboring communities as examples of successful economic growth achieved by using aggressive planning strategies to increase commercial development.
The Mayor responded that the department was in a period of transition as one of the reasons for the delay in posting of the positions, but he assured the Council that several of its members would participate in the search for the Planning Director, which is expected to be completed by the end of June. The Mayor noted that additional staffing decisions should be made after leadership is stabilized. The Planning Department budget ultimately passed 19-4.
Resolution No. 3: DPW and the Rain Barrel Program
The Administration declined to restart the City’s rain barrel program, citing limited demand and the availability of private alternatives. Officials stated they instead plan to expand online resources for water conservation as part of the revamp of the City’s website. Although some Councilors discussed broader sustainability and climate issues, the DPW budget and enterprise funds were approved.
Resolution No. 4: Reduction and/or Elimination of Bus Fees
Resolution No. 5: Finding a Depot Site for Electric Buses
Discussion of both of these resolutions were taken together. The Mayor opposed reducing bus fees, noting that the School Department would prioritize other education needs over elimination of these fees if additional funding were available. While some Councilors reiterated their concerns that the policy was contrary to sustainability goals, the Councilors accepted the Mayor’s rejection of the resolution.
The Mayor also opposed the resolution requesting the Mayor to find suitable locations to store electric buses. Councilor Albright suggested that not having available sites raises issues of equity and environmental justice, particularly if buses are stored outside of Newton. COO Morse explained that the Administration had looked at 155 sites around Newton and does not believe that finding a location is an impediment to getting electric buses. He said they will continue to work with NPS to support the use of electric buses.
On the vote in Committee of the Whole to accept the NPS budget, 22 voted in favor, Councilor Micley voted no, and Councilor Roche abstained.
Resolution No. 6: Independent legal counsel for City Council
The sixth resolution, submitted in the May 26 meeting, called for access to independent outside legal counsel for the City Council when conflicts arise with the Law Department. Councilors emphasized that while the Law Department serves the City as a whole, conflicts can occur when the Council and Mayor are at odds on legal or policy matters. They discussed the need for truly independent representation outside of the City Solicitor’s office and raised concerns about ethics and potential for conflicts of interest. They noted that there were further details that would have to be considered should the resolution pass, including procedures and process for when and how outside counsel would be employed and funded. Councilor Micley said, “I think the current Mayor was part of the City Council and previously advocated for it,” adding that he would be interested in the Mayor’s change of rationale. Although the resolution passed unanimously (23-0, 1 absent), the Councilors ultimately accepted the Administration’s response that the Law Department adequately represents the entire City and there should be no transfer of any funding to the Clerk’s Office for an independent attorney for the City Council. CFO Lemieux said, “While we appreciate comments of the City Council, we believe that the Law Department represents the City in its entirety …and do not wish to move any part of law department’s budget to the Clerk’s office.”
City Council approves FY27 Budget of $668,336,666
After addressing the resolutions, the Council voted to approve the overall budget by a vote of 23-1.
There was a slight bit of confusion in this vote as Councilor Roche wanted to vote against the overall budget, so a motion was offered to reconsider the vote. Reconsideration is generally offered at the end of the budget vote so that the Council can vote NO on reconsideration, which makes the vote final. However, because Councilor Roche wanted to vote NO on the overall budget, a motion to reconsider was offered. During that vote, Councilors Block, Malakie, and Silber voted No.
Since the majority of the Council voted to approve reconsideration, the Council re-voted the budget. In that second vote, the Council voted to approve 22 – 2, with Councilors Micley and Roche voting against.