I have to be quick today as I’m pressed for time and my heart wasn’t really into last night’s meeting. I blame the weather. It took me two hours to get home from work and it broke me mentally and spiritually. I had nothing left by 6:30.

Good time to mention that spring is just around the corner and registration is open for Lowell Youth Baseball and Softball:

As to the meeting, there was an interesting discussion relative to a motion from Councilors Mercier and Robinson:

Req. City Mgr. provide the City Council with a detailed report on a pathway to secure independent legal counsel of our choosing to review and advise concerns the Council may have.

Under our “Plan E” form of government, responsibility is split between the legislative body (the City Council) and the executive branch (the City Manager). The council makes policy. The manager runs the administration. Corey Williams, our City Solicitor and his law department sit inside the administrative branch and ultimately answer to the City Manager – not the Council.

Lately, there is a sense that certain councilors, namely Gitschier, Robinson, and perhaps the newly-sworn McDonough, are questioning whether the legal advice it receives is filtered through the policy priorities of the administration.

To be clear, no one has stood up and said outright that they distrust the solicitor and, by extension, the manager (last week, Mayor Gitschier came pretty damn close). However, the implication is unavoidable.

If there is genuine distrust, my thought is that the hiring of outside counsel isn’t really a solution; it’s a workaround or a half-measure. The solution can already be found in our charter. The Manager serves at the pleasure of the Council. The council can fire the manager. If the council is unhappy with the manager or believes the administration is using its law department to advance a particular agenda they don’t approve of – just get a majority together and replace the manager.

Otherwise, what we’re really talking about is hiring lawyers to tell a minority faction of councilors what they want to hear. Two interpretations of the same law, each conveniently aligning with the political preferences of whoever hired the lawyer. I have some experience in this forum, I’m an intellectual whore a lawyer. If you pay me, I can probably craft you an argument that advances your interests.

In the end, the motion passed 10-1 with only Councilor Descoteaux opposing. Based on the discussion, many voted “yes” on the grounds that the motion merely seeks a report (of note is the obvious catch that the city solicitor will be drafting the response as to whether his opinions could or should be second-guessed).

However, so long as a majority of Councilors approve of the manager’s office, I doubt that any vote authorizing a release of funds for independent counsel will go anywhere.

Is this just a normal and healthy tension found in Plan E? Does it signal something deeper relative to Manager/Councilor relations? Am I still brain-dead from a 2-hour ride home listening to sports talk radio?

Difficult questions.

Stay tuned, fanatics.