Hey, there! Log in / Register
What if Lydia Edwards doesn't want to leave her city-council seat?
By adamg on Fri, 01/21/2022 - 12:11pm
Update: She'll resign on April 30.
GBH reports the now dual councilor/senator doesn't want to talk about leaving her council seat. Maybe at some point, she says. There's no law that says she has to give up the job as councilor.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Of interest training is first thing for any City employee.
How this is not one such conflict, I’m not sure but to the victors the spoils.
No law that she wants to mention
Except for the laws that govern having two jobs at once covered under the civil service laws, that is. She needs special permission from what I remember from the trainings.
It would make sense to stay
It would make sense to stay through the summer, timing it so that the preliminary + special election is part of the regular 2022 elections this fall. That would save the city money.
You can’t possibly do both jobs at once. That’s not what she was elected to do.
Didn't bother Tim Toomey
He was a City Councilor and State Rep for decades.
Certainly didn't bother Mayor Willy up in Lawrence. More opportunity for bribes!
She could wait to step down until whenever it would be in March which would trigger a special election on the same day as election day, and the the new Councilor would start earlier. But if she steps down, D1 is without a Councilor for most of the next year. So, would you rather have a half-time Councilor or no Councilor?
... and Toomey was bad at
... and Toomey was bad at both jobs.
I don't know who Tim Toomey is
But I will guess he is some transit adjacent goblin/hero, given your fascination.
I can't believe you are debating this. I can only assume it's not in good faith.
You can’t possibly do both
The counterexample to that argument is Kim Janey. She was not elected to do the job of Acting Mayor. She held that job at the same time she was a District City Councilor.
Acting mayor isn't an
Acting mayor isn't an elective office, it's a default.
Did she work as a city councilor?
No, she was the mayor. This is facile logic. Don’t waste our time.
Kinda weird considering her
Kinda weird considering her former chief of staff is running to replace her. I'd assume they discussed this previously?
This is why those who currently hold a political office
should be required to COMPLETE THEIR TERM (unless due to death, serious injury, or illness) and declared ineligible to take another office or appointment during that term.
How is keeping someone in a job they don't want going to help anyone?
People should step down as soon as they aren't willing to completely devote themselves to the office.
I need clarification
Does this mean you support her doing both jobs?
Pay cut? Well you knew that going in
This seems to be all about the money. She'd have to take a $30k pay cut to JUST be in the Senate. I'm guessing that she knew that before she ran. Sorry, but you can't do both jobs effectively, so pick one.
Interesting point; entry
Interesting point; entry level pay at the State Senate is $62,500; that would be a little more than $4k/month after taxes -although most are getting some bonus pay by being assigned to one committee or another. With Boston's high cost of living, that's a rather low salary for a job that (ideally) requires a good level of education and skills.
That said, I hope that Edwards doesn't pull a Charles Yancey-like move on us. Or if she does, she deserves the same fate. Yancey is the former D4 city councilor who ran simultaneously for mayor and city councilor (incumbent candidate) in 2013. Even though he was a well established in his district, two years later newcomer Andrea Campbell ousted him 61/39. That was a good day for local democracy.
Neither is a full-time job
I see nothing wrong with holding two part-time jobs even if they are both elected positions. The only reason why I might have an objection would be if there was an actual conflict that could not be addressed by simply recusing oneself from selected votes (and there are few, if any, such situations).
I will add that there are actually advantages to having a city councillor who can also be an advocate as a state representative or state senator.
One Big Problem
She cannot represent the city on issues before the state, and she cannot represent the state on issues before the city.
Meaning: she can't be involved in any matters where the city is asking the state for something, and she can't be involved in any issues where the state regulates the city.
That is a problem right there.
Well since state legislators are only allowed by the leadership to vote on one or two days a year what’s the problem?!
Magoo thinks Magoo has been teleported to the famous Seattle fish market because woo wheee something smells fishy. Magoo.
What if she wants to run for
What if she wants to run for Governor and decides to keep the city council seat and the State senator’s seat at the same time?
I support that she wants to do both jobs
I've met her several times, and every time I see her on the T she is approachable. Lydia's perfectly capable of doing both jobs.
She certainly wants to be
She certainly wants to be paid for both jobs.
Interesting and this
Interesting and this assessment is based on your opinion she's approachable. And, I'll bet you don't vote.
People have done this before
Denise Provost in Somerville (for a while, until she decided to quit the Board of Aldermen)
Saundra Graham in Cambridge
Tim Toomey in Cambridge
didn't Ray Flynn do this, too?
Marty still worked for the union while he was mayor, right?
This is not the same
But if it were him,
And not here in THIS situation at this time in our City…
the optics would be so bad it would not be a back story.
TO THE VICTORS…THE SPOILS.
if she becomes a congressperson...
she would simultaneously be a municipal, state and federal elected official (then u.n. ambassador ?).