Letter: Alex Blumin for City Council

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor: I am excited to endorse Mr. Alex Blumin for Ward 2 City Council. When we elect Mr. Blumin, we continue Ward 2's tradition of self-governance. We consistently choose the independent voice to represent our interests. We have a tradition of preserving a philosophy of reasonable inquiry of elected officials, and we demand responsible financial governance.

Ward 2 awaits the city's fulfillment of its promises to complete roadwork and fix abandoned homes. Mr. Blumin will push the city to achieve these promises. The mayor aggressively hiked water and sewer rates twice in the last two years, and she promised more increases. Ward 2 residents worry about the ever-expanding city budget they are forced to fund. Alex Blumin shares your worries and will fight for responsible budgets. Mr. Blumin will continue to promote reducing your taxes and reducing water rates by using your tax dollars locked in free cash and the cannabis reserves.

City Hall spending lacks transparency. The next councilor will see the $41 million in ARPA funds spent down. The ARPA Advisory Committee meets in secret and spends money on projects that do not appear to benefit Ward 2. The City Council has not had any input on a single dollar spent. Mr. Blumin would dare to ask the hard questions: What did the ARPA Committee discuss in their secret meetings? Pittsfield Economic Development Authority (PEDA) has new funding coming up. Will it support the destitute business environment in Pittsfield and Ward 2? Mr. Blumin will insist that it does.

When Mr. Blumin whispered "corruption" in his debate, he dared to state a fact of our government that many councilors privately discuss. I saw a man display his love and admiration for our legal traditions and institutions. You saw his courage to hold our leaders to high standards and principles.

Mr. Blumin has a long involvement in city politics, and the time is now for him to lead. He has the intelligence and courage to do the job. Ward 2, you must turn out on Sept. 19, and I strongly urge you to vote for Alex Blumin for your councilor.

Charles Kronick
Pittsfield, Mass.

Charles Kronick is the current Ward 2 councilor and is not running for re-election.

 

 


Tags: election 2023,   endorsement,   municipal election,   


If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

SJC: Public Records Petition 'Proper'

Staff Reports
BOSTON — The Supreme Judicial Court in an advisory opinion released Monday found the petition to bring the Legislature and governor's office under the Public Records Law is "proper" as a form of law.
 
"Its principal purpose is not to regulate the internal proceedings or operations of the two Houses," the court wrote. "Instead, its principal purpose is to provide the public with a new right of access to the records of the General Court and the office of the Governor, applying the existing public records law to those bodies alongside the other governmental bodies already subject to the law. "
 
The state Senate asked the Supreme Judicial Court to weigh in on whether public records petition was a violation of the state constitution. The Legislature is required to act on the matter by May 5; if not, supporters plan to put it on the ballot in November. 
 
Auditor Diana DiZoglio has championed the petition as a measure to bring greater transparency to the workings of state government and as part of her own battle to audit the Legislature. More than 70 percent of voters approved the audit question in November 2024. 
 
The Senate asked the court whether, first, the petition was a law or a rule that would interfere with its internal processes and, second, would it create "new and unprecedented authority" to the courts to determine challenges to records determinations.
 
The court offered "that the petition proposes a law and is therefore properly pending before the Legislature" and, for Question 2, concluded "that the proposed measure does not relate to the powers of courts."
 
The court declined to answer three following questions related to intrusions on Senate authority and General Court authority, and violation of rights of  "deliberation, speech and debate" granted to members and staff.
View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories