The Pittsfield city elections were held more than two months ago, but the campaign continues. It is past time for the new City Council to move on.
Seven days in to Pittsfield Mayor Peter Marchetti’s first term and he’s already received a mandate from the City Council: Send us back a level-funded budget — or close to one.
Just a week into the administration of Mayor Peter Marchetti, the council voted 7-4 in support of a petition from new councilor-at-large Kathy Amuso that the mayor provide the Council with a budget “that is close to level funding.” It is unclear how “close” is to be defined, but Marchetti said that level funding would result in about $8 million in cuts, which translates into cutting meat and bone.
The council’s first attempt at governing is more like another phase of the campaign. Ideally the last phase.
The petition contains the qualifier “knowing that contracts need to be filled,” which renders the level funding demand irrelevant. Councilors favoring the petition spoke of the need to “send a message” or “make a statement,” but the time to do either ended on Election Day. The actual “message” being sent to voters by the council majority is that the petition is symbolic and there is no expectation that the mayor will actually hack the budget.
And if Marchetti did come “close” to level funding the budget, some of the same councilors who backed the petition would scream bloody murder about the cuts being proposed. Pittsfield is certainly not the only community that would like to see taxes cut and services expanded in defiance of math and logic. But these contradictory impulses do run deep in the city, which is why costly projects like the wastewater treatment plant upgrade and various fee increases get put off until they can’t be any longer and residents get hit with fat bills that could have been spread out over a period of years.
It’s perplexing that the seven councilors decided to go this route now given the tenor of the campaign. The candidates who campaigned on personal grievances, fought lost causes or dragged up settled issues fared poorly. The campaigns of those who won might not have been bold or visionary, but they were generally realistic and positive in tone.
So why start grandstanding now?
In his inauguration speech, Marchetti outlined some of his plans, and they will require a financial investment. Boosting the Small Business Trust involves providing funds now in anticipation of building the business tax base later. Providing desperately needed affordable housing will require funding for construction and renovation.
There seems to be general agreement that the city must better address the mental health issues in the community that fuel crime. That, as the new mayor outlined in his inauguration address, will mean more co-responders and social workers for the Police Department. Addressing complex municipal problems often means spending money, and it is naive or disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
But specifics aside, every new mayor deserves an opportunity to get his or her feet on the ground before being blindsided with ultimatums or semi-ultimatums issued for show. Marchetti certainly deserves that chance and councilors might want to put politics aside at least for a little while and give the new mayor that opportunity.
Bill Everhart writes about city and state politics for The Eagle.
