Close
Current temperature in Boston - 62 °
BECOME A MEMBER
Get access to a personalized news feed, our newsletter and exclusive discounts on everything from shows to local restaurants, All for free.
Already a member? Sign in.
The Bay State Banner
BACK TO TOP
The Bay State Banner
POST AN AD SIGN IN

Trending Articles

Wellness expo brings community support to Roxbury residents

Sarah-Ann Shaw, Boston's reporting legend, 90

Uncle Nearest Premium Whiskey honors first African American Master Distiller’s legacy

READ PRINT EDITION

City councilors vote 11-2 to extend terms to four years

Proposal is one of several councilors advance, must go before Legislature

Trea Lavery

Boston city councilors last week voted 11-2 to extend their terms from two to four years.

The change was proposed earlier this month by Council President Andrea Campbell, along with other reforms, including prohibiting municipal candidates from running for more than one position at a time, which the council also passed last week, and requiring a special election if an at-large council seat is vacated, which they have yet to vote on.

Most of the councilors voiced their support for the term extension, which would go into effect after the current terms for each of the sitting councilors are up.

“The fact that this is enacted in 2021, I can imagine that folks who are looking at a four-year term rather than a two-year term will come out of the woodwork to try to run for city council, which I think is a good thing,” said Councilor Lydia Edwards.

Campbell said when she proposed the changes that extending the council term to four years would allow councilors to focus on projects that take longer than two years, rather than getting reelected.

Not all of the council supported the change, however. Councilors Michelle Wu and Josh Zakim both voted against it, arguing that a two-year term creates accountability for councilors.

“The makeup of this council today is because of the opportunity every two years to challenge and bring new people into the process,” Wu said, noting that there are more examples in the city’s history of incumbent councilors losing their seats to challengers in non-mayoral election years than mayoral election years, which wouldn’t happen if the term length changed.

Both dissenting votes said that while they were not in support of this change, they were in favor of reforming municipal elections.

“If we’re talking about expanding turnout and expanding opportunity, we should also be talking about ranked choice voting in all of our city elections,” Zakim said. He also suggested moving municipal elections to even years when state and federal offices are on the ballot. Elections in even years consistently have much higher turnout, even in non-presidential election years.

The second vote at the council meeting prohibited candidates from running for more than one seat at a time, which passed 14-1.

“I would assume that 99.9 percent of people who seek office intend to win,” said Councilor Matt O’Malley before the vote. “You’re removing the fact that someone could run for more than one seat at the same time. Presumably he or she would hope to win both seats, and that would immediately set up a special election or some sort of vacancy.”

Both changes are home rule petitions, and must pass in the State House before going into effect. All three home rule petitions proposed by Campbell have been passed by the council in the past, and failed to pass the State House.

“A four-year term does not set the bar or make it more difficult for a new person to get in the process,” O’Malley said. “I would argue that it does just the opposite, and gets more involvement and higher turnout, which is something we should celebrate.”