In this recent exchange with a Hopedale Constituent, the resident expresses his dissatisfaction with a state representative who was elected as Mayor in his home city, and who plans on staying in both elected offices, while collecting both salaries.  Senator Moore agrees with the constituent's concerns, and although he emphasizes that the Representative/Mayor's actions are legal, Senator Moore follows up on the Hopedale Constituent's concerns and finds out some additional information .  Find out more about this issue below:

---

From: A Worcester Resident
To: Senator Moore

To Senator Richard Moore,

Hello. I am writing to you concerning the House vote on Bill 4421. As you know, this bill will provide a 35 million dollar "loan" to the Mayor William Lantigua and the city of Lawrence, MA. Although I am a resident of Hopedale, I am ( like you ) a taxpayer to the Commonwealth and have been directly affected by the decrease in State funding to our district. Teachers jobs have been lost, we will have to regionalize our school system, school bus fees, athletics fees (165 per season) season, freeze on police and firefighter hiring....the list goes on and on. 

In my friends and neighbors opinions, elected officials should lead by example and conduct. Mr William Lantigua currently occupied (2) positions with the government of Massachusetts ( Mayor of Lawrence and State Rep for the city of Lawrence) as well as serving on the House Ways and Means Committee. What message is being sent to the tax payer struggling day to  day when a public servant draws (2) salaries, pensions, staffs and refuses to step down. How is it not a huge conflict of interest in which a House member on the finance committee will be voting for money his administration will receive ? How are people to trust and believe in the integrity of elected officials when there actions validate their blatant indifference to fiscal constraint ?

I appreciate and thank you for taking the time to listen to the concerns of many of my friends and neighbors and I request that you consider these issues when casting your vote on this bill next week. Thanks for your work representing the needs and concerns of the people of Worcester county.

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Hopedale Constituent

Dear Hopedale Constituent:

House Bill No. 4421 was filed by the Governor at the end of 2009 and admitted in the Legislature on January 6, 2010. It is currently in the House Committee on Ways and Means. I share your concern with the dual office holding by the new mayor and state representative which, although legal, does not engender public confidence. There is a bill that would prohibit anyone from serving simultaneously as a mayor and legislator. I also am concerned that the fiscal controls in the bill may be insufficient to protect the interests of the state's taxpayers. I will do some research to determine if it is as strong as the legislation passed during the 1990's regarding the city of Springfield and also for the city of Chelsea. I will not support legislation that is not as fiscally responsible as the laws passed for these other cities and I do not intend to support any legislation while the mayor of Lawrence serves as a legislator.

Senator Richard T. Moore

Follow up from Senator Moore:

By way of follow up, the Governor was quoted this week as saying he would like to see Mayor Lantigua resign his House seat, but he cannot force him to do so.  Of course, I can't either, but I don't have to vote for a week bailout either.

Senator Moore

---

From: Hopedale Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Senator:

Thanks for your response.  I agree [with the Governor's response as well].  Thanks Again

Hopedale Constituent

---

From: Senator Moore
To: Hopedale Constituent

Dear Hopedale Constituent:

I spoke today with Senator Susan Tucker who represents Lawrence in the Senate. She has told Mayor Lantigua that he should not hold the dual positions of mayor and state representative and that doing so made passage of the legislation in doubt. She also told me that no state money would be involved in the loan that is requested. It amounts to borrowing against future state aid and will be done through commercial sources with appropriate interest charged. In addition, the overseer who will be paid with funds from the city and given office space in the city hall, is appointed by the State Secretary of Administration and Finance. The Governor chose this model of giving the city a year to get their act together under review by an overseer rather than immediate removal of financial authority from the local elected mayor and council (as was done in Springfield’s case) because of the appearance that it would look like a racist action – for example, taking away the power of the new mayor, the first Hispanic elected to lead a city in Massachusetts, right after he was elected. I don’t know that this is a good reason, but I can understand that the state government might not want to appear insensitive. However, the bill does provide that if the city fails to get things under control and state-appointed control board would be put in place and the mayor and council would lose their authority.

I hope this helps with your understanding of the proposed legislation – which is still in the House Committee on Ways and Means. I will continue to monitor the situation.

Senator Moore

---

From: Hopedale Constituent
To: Senator Moore

Thanks for the details. Although I disagree on a number of points, I appreciate your follow up and attention to this important matter...

Thanks Again