Tweaks proposed for home rule

Representative Marcos A. Devers, a Lawrence Democrat, is working on a bill that would give elected councils the ability to override mayoral vetoes of home rule petitions with a two-thirds vote. The move, he said, would allow city governments to mirror the system of checks and balances present at the state and federal levels.

“There is executive and legislative power [at the local level], but it’s missing a third piece — the ability to override,’’ Devers said. “This would create more transparency, and in these times, that’s the message government needs to send. . . . This [legislation] would show that federal, state, and local governments have the same working philosophy.’’

Presently, cities with elected mayors and councils can make changes to their charters through home rule petitions filed or approved by voters, or by the mayor and city council. Those petitions are then forwarded to the Legislature for a final decision. Charter changes proposed at the government level must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the city council and signed by both the council and the mayor before being forwarded to the State House.

But therein lies the rub, Devers said. If the mayor fails to sign the petition, it cannot be forwarded to the Legislature. In the draft document he submitted to the House counsel for review, Devers said, “This requirement gives the executive branch the veto power but takes away the override power of the legislative branch.’’

Devers said he was prompted to file the legislation after Mayor William Lantigua last year declined to sign an ordinance change approved by a 7-2 City Council vote that sought to prevent city employees from simultaneously holding elected positions on the School Committee, which is chaired by the mayor.

Lantigua did not return calls seeking comment.

The outcome was déjà vu all over again for the ordinance petitioner, City Councilor Modesto Maldonado, who as a private resident in 2000 filed a similar citizens petition that was approved by the City Council in 2001, but was not forwarded to the Legislature by then-mayor Patricia Dowling.

Maldonado, who asked Devers to sponsor the current override legislation, said he does not think it would weaken the power of elected mayors because it isn’t easy to get two-thirds of a council to agree on any particular issue, and because the ultimate decision on home rule petitions falls to the Legislature.

“I feel very strongly that it’s the right thing to do,’’ Maldonado said. “If the [state] representatives and senators are honest with each other, they will support this measure. It will create a balance that the cities don’t have right now. Let’s hope that they do.’’

In 1999, an attempt by the Gloucester City Council to override a mayor’s veto of a home rule petition with a two-thirds vote was nullified after an opinion issued by the state Supreme Judicial Court that year reiterated that approval also requires the mayor’s signature. The justices went on to say that such override power “would make more likely the submission to the Legislature of petitions for special legislation that have received only hasty consideration, and limited reflection, by the local body, and that are not supported by the elected chief executive officer of the municipality.’’

Scott Lang, Massachusetts Mayors’ Association president and New Bedford mayor, said giving city councils override power “would be a mistake.

“Home rule petitions should have widespread appeal,’’ Lang said. “I think councils have very strong and appropriate roles in our cities, but veto override power would lead to an awful lot of gridlock. The best way to solve that is through the ballot box. It’s not a good idea to legislate through referendum.’’

Revere Mayor Thomas G. Ambrosino said he would not object to councils having the ability to override a veto.

“I agree that’s sort of an oddity of home rule petitions that they can’t be sent without the mayor’s signature,’’ Ambrosino said. “There have been things I’ve sent to the Legislature that I didn’t think were all that wise, but I sent them because the majority of the council approved them. But I expressed to [the legislators] that I wasn’t particularly keen on it.’’

Dan Mulcare, assistant professor of political science at Salem State University, said it is puzzling that local city councils don’t already have veto override power.

“I’m surprised that the mayors in this case would have that kind of authority. I would support this as an additional check on executive power,’’ Mulcare said. “Right now, mayors are pocket-vetoing legislation by not even looking or signing it. . . . I see that as very anti-democratic.’’

For Lawrence, the legislation would come at an opportune time, as the appointed Charter Commission is getting ready to finalize its proposed changes, among them prohibiting city employees from serving on the School Committee, said City Councilor Eileen O’Connor Bernal, who also chairs the commission. Proposed charter changes will be submitted to the City Council in about a month for consideration, then to the city lawyer for review, and finally to the mayor, she said.

Katheleen Conti can be reached at kconti@globe.com.