Framingham City Council Embraces Climate Change Charter Recommendation

The August 6, 2024 City Council meeting was devoted to reviewing and voting on the recommendations of the Charter Review Committee. Most of the recommendations were accepted and the ones that were rejected were not critical.

After all, if the City Council wants to have inauguration day on January 1st, rather than the recommended second business day in January, then so be it. Or if it wants to retain in the City Charter, a long section on Allotments, which is a tedious, complicated way to track the minutiae of city spending, has never been used in 7 years and is rarely found in city charters, so be it.

But the biggest strategic Charter Review Committee recommendation for the City Charter, which the City Council accepted, was the one which established substantive environmental action as a core task for the city administration by adding a Chief Climate and Sustainability Officer to the Mayor’s appointments:

“Article III: Executive Branch

...

3. Appointments by the Mayor

...

f) Chief Climate and Sustainability Officer - The mayor shall appoint a chief climate and sustainability officer to work with municipal departments and multiple-member bodies to develop and implement strategies to address climate mitigation and resiliency. The chief climate and sustainability officer will set strategic goals for climate response, report on progress towards those goals, and prioritize and coordinate climate and sustainability in municipal planning, budgeting and procurement.”

This is a ground-breaking move for Framingham government, which has struggled to produce a Climate Action Plan, and has been sitting on the sidelines of the climate change battlefield, letting other cities and towns, and its own residents and businesses do the hard work of combating climate change and saving the planet.

Framingham government has also let most of the federal and state incentives for solar installations pass us by, losing many tens of millions of dollars in utility savings over the last decade.

It is remarkable that the Mayor only realized in the last few months how much money the federal Inflation Reduction Act (passed on August 16, 2022) could bring into the city if it pushed ahead with more solar installations. He had cut the Farley solar roof project, but got a great deal of pushback which finally educated him on the huge advantages of expanding solar installations.

But still, he only approved a Farley design effort, rather than fully funding the project. See:

Framingham Mayor Rejects Millions in Utility Savings in Fiscal Crisis

Residents Fight for Mayor to Re-Energize Framingham's Solar Effort

Framingham Mayor Delays on the Farley Solar Roof

Adding a Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer to the other charter mandated Mayoral appointments, which include the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Operating Officer, boosts the importance of climate change action and invests a top Mayoral appointee with the power to do something about it.

The City Charter would finally command climate change action.

The Mayor’s poor record on climate change action has also been exacerbated by the fact that for 7 years the financial leadership of the City Council has shown little enthusiasm for investing in climate change action. That especially includes Councilors King and Leombruno and former Councilor Stefanini.

But the fiercest resistance has been led by Councilor Mike Cannon, who has opposed solar installation build outs at every step of the way, as was detailed in a prior article:

Framingham's Cannon and Leombruno Get an F on Climate Change Action

True to form, in this City Council review of the Charter Review Committee’s recommendations, Mike Cannon continued his implacable opposition to climate change action by using every argument he could to try to block addition of the Chief Climate and Sustainability Officer to the city administration.

Fortunately, a large majority of the City Council saw the great merit of a Chief Climate and Sustainability Officer and approved the Charter Review Committee recommendation in a 9-2 vote, especially after stalwart support was delivered by Energize Framingham’s Aimee Powelka and by Senator Magnani, a member of the Charter Review Committee:

Energize Framingham's Aimee Powelka Argues for a Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer

Framingham's Senator Magnani Argues for a Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer

Senator Magnani made the especially powerful point that initially the Charter Review Committee was somewhat skeptical of adding the Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer, but completely reversed its position after seeing all of the data and arguments, going from just a single member initially voting for approval to an 8-1 approval.

Following the City Council review and approval process, came a discussion of when the charter changes would be put to a community vote. The City Clerk recommended strongly against including it it the November 2024 election vote, as election rules require a separate ballot for the charter question, and having two ballots for each voter to fill out would be complicated and confusing.

The realistic options were then either a special election vote in the spring of 2025, or to include the charter vote in the November election of 2025, where the election rules would allow a single ballot as it would be just a local election.

The City Council voted for the November 2025 election timing.

The simple question remains as to why wait 15 months to put this to a vote?

Remember, that the Fuller debt exclusion special election vote was successfully carried out on December 12, 2018, just a month after the November 2018 election.

It seems very reasonable to hold a special election for the community to vote on the charter changes in the first few months of 2025. That would allow the community time to settle down after the presidential election and to focus just on the charter issues.

It would also set up the FY26 budget to include support for the Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer and accelerate the schedule for ramping up solar installation projects. The savings to the city from earlier progress on climate change action projects would be much greater than the $50,000 cost of the special election.

It is likely also, in my view, that the Mayoral election in November 2025 will not be a tranquil affair and could divert attention of the voters away from the charter change issues.

It would be really great if the City Council could revisit the timing of the charter change vote and move it much earlier than currently planned.

After all, the planet is not getting any cooler, and delays make the climate change problem worse.