Framingham City Council Fumbles Hiring of Mandatory Financial Advisor

Under the City Charter which became operational on January 1st, 2018, the City Council is required to hire an 'Auditor', which is described in Article II, Section 8a, on p.19 of the charter as follows:

"8. OFFICERS APPOINTED BY COUNCIL

a) Auditor: The council shall appoint an auditor to serve for a term of three (3) years and until a successor is chosen and qualified. The auditor shall conduct, or cause to be conducted, financial and performance audits following government auditing standards as promulgated by the comptroller-general of the United States. The auditor shall make periodic reports to the council in such detail and with such frequency as the council shall, by ordinance, by rule or by other vote, direct. All officials and employees of the municipality shall cooperate with the auditor in the performance of this audit function. The auditor shall have such other powers and duties as may be provided by charter, byordinance or by other vote of the council."

The importance of such a position is obvious, as each of the three branches of government defined in the City Charter, needs sound financial information to successfully govern. The Executive Branch has a Chief Financial Officer appointed by the Mayor, the School Committee hires an Executive Director of Finance & Operations, and the Legislative Branch, the City Council, hires an Auditor.

It is therefore remarkable that in more than 7 years since Framingham became a city, the Auditor position has never been filled.

This is not only an ongoing, serious violation of the City Charter, but has left the City Council in a weak position, as it tries to make sense of city financial planning. With no independent means to verify, review or supplement financial information supplied to it by the city administration, the City Council has had great difficulty in gauging both the financial trajectory of the city, and the level of investment needed to properly maintain city infrastructure and services.

Although the City Council has the power to require financial and other reports to be provided by the city administration, it has had no staff to carry such efforts through to completion. It is fair to say that the City Council has been seriously handicapped by a chronic lack of comprehensive city financial information for more than 7 years.

There have been 4 attempts to fill the Auditor position. Here are the job postings:

• March 14, 2018 Job Posting (10 applicants)
• July 1, 2020 Job Posting (21 applicants)
• October 18, 2021 Job Posting (1 applicant)
• July 30, 2024 Job Posting (18 applicants)

The first 3 attempts failed to produce a hire, likely because the position was never taken seriously by the City Council financial leadership, as it was initially posted as a part-time position, or as an hourly rate position. Only the most recent posting described the position as a regular, full-time salaried position.

The 4th attempt last summer was a much more serious effort to fill the position, with special care taken in making sure that the job description matched City Council needs, due in large part to the efforts of City Councilors Mallach and Steiner. Further, although the position remains designated as ‘Auditor’ in the charter, the title for hiring purposes was changed to ‘Financial Analyst’, which is much more aligned with the true nature of the position.

By October 2024, 18 applications had been received, but it took a further 5 months for the top two candidates to be interviewed by the full City Council in their meeting on March 18, 2025. One thing that could be said about the two surviving candidates is that they must have patience and endurance.

In that March 18, 2025, City Council meeting, those two candidates were asked 5 set piece questions, plus City Councilors got to ask follow-up questions. When that section of the meeting was complete, the City Council deliberated with the obvious intent to choose one of the two, and finally fill the vacant position.

It was quite clear from the City Council deliberations that Nicholas Lima was an excellent fit to the job and had the edge, with diverse private sector experience, very good communication skills, a forthright manner, Spanish and Portuguese language skills, and his current course of work on a Bachelor of Business Administration in the well regarded Isenberg School of Management at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

All City Councilors voiced an opinion during the discussion, and the count looked to be 9-2 in favor of hiring Nicholas Lima.

The only real objections to such favorable action were voiced by City Councilors King and Cannon, who were concerned about the lack of municipal experience in both candidates, but even then King conceded that candidates with municipal experience were uncommon.

From their comments, it was clear that King and Cannon wanted to declare the hiring process a failure and re-open the search. However, they could sense the mood in the room and the strong intentions of their fellow City Councilors to approve a Nicholas Lima hire.

So, King and Cannon switched to a different approach to torpedo the hiring by raising the issue of a hiring freeze which the Mayor had initially omitted in his report earlier in the meeting but let slip when answering a question from City Councilor Ward on filling a job vacancy.

The hiring freeze threat spooked the City Council, and it voted to table the motion to hire Nicholas Lima to a date two weeks hence.

Here lies the problem.

There are three branches of government laid out in the City Charter: Executive, Legislative, School Committee. The Mayor can apply a hiring freeze to his domain, just as the School Committee/Superintendent can apply a hiring freeze to their domain. The City Council occupies a third separate domain which is not subject to the Mayor’s authority.

So, even if the Mayor actually is going to impose a hiring freeze, he cannot force it on the City Council’s handful of positions. That is a simple separation of powers charter issue.

Further, the City Council is entirely reliant on the Mayor and the Executive Branch for all its financial information, because it does not have its own independent Financial Analyst and so will not be able to figure out independently whether the hiring freeze is justified by the financial data.

The City Council can trust, but it cannot verify. That is why it needs a Financial Analyst.

Further, they now have a heads up from the Mayor’s actions that troubled financial waters lie ahead. In such a situation, it seems more urgent than ever that the City Council get a Financial Analyst on board as soon as possible.

The City Council will be flying blind on the hiring freeze need, and they will continue to fly blind on all of the myriad financial problems which will be presented by the upcoming FY26 budget process without a Financial Analyst on board.

It seems imperative that the City Council hire Nicholas Lima as their Financial Analyst ASAP, if they are to do their job properly in working through the very tough financial challenges ahead.

No one should want a 4th failure to hire a mandatory, charter-required, critically important financial support position for the City Council.

One thing is for sure.

The Financial Analyst should report to the City Council Chair and the City Council, not to the Finance Subcommittee leadership of City Councilors King and Cannon, who have been so negative in this whole affair.

It is disturbing to find the King/Cannon leadership of the City Council Finance Subcommittee in opposition to the rest of the City Council in such a fundamental hire, which greatly affects the sound operation of the City Council in all financial matters.