Boston City Councilor Deflects Responsibility for Budget Cuts to Veterans and Public Safety, Blames Colleague Amidst Budget Battle with Mayor Wu
Share:
In many ways, yesterday’s Boston City Council special meeting could be considered the “Tania Show.” As chair of the Ways and Means Committee, Tania Fernandes-Anderson was tasked with submitting the City Council’s budget amendments back to Mayor Wu for consideration.
The Council’s amendments, which have been reported on by both The Boston Globe and The Boston Herald, gutted Wu’s original proposal and reallocated funds in a manner that sparked outrage across the city.
The most controversial of these changes came in the form of cuts to funding for Boston’s veterans and public safety unions.
Ultimately, the Council did not approve these amendments unilaterally and, after some flip-flopping by Councilor Coletta (District 1) and Councilor Worrell (District 4), the amendments were approved by a vote of 6 in favor, 5 opposed, and 1 voting “present.”
Very shortly after receiving the Council’s proposed changes, Mayor Wu vetoed their amendments.
It is this veto which prompted yesterday’s special council meeting so that Wu’s decision could be formally “received” by the city’s legislative body.
During the meeting, which Anderson arrived late for, the District 7 representative delivered an impassioned speech on the floor of the Ianella Chamber which we have included below. Those interested in watching the full council meeting can view it here.
As can be seen in the above video, several times during her speech Anderson seemingly deflects blame for cuts to the city’s veterans on another member of the City Council whom she is unwilling to identify.
Anderson is quoted as saying:
“I will not call on the colleague that proposed these amendments, but I personally want to apologize. I should have listened to my instinct. I fought against this cut. It’s not that it would actually hurt the department fiscally, but optically or politically it’s a bad, bad move...I never intended to hurt anyone and, even again, it wasn’t my proposed cut. I didn’t ask for it and I actually fought against it. But again, I’m not going to embarrass anyone and say who actually proposed it.”
The Council’s proposed cuts to veterans, which totaled upwards of $900,000, would have slashed that department’s funding by nearly 14% in order to prioritize programs aimed at “Returning Citizens” (those recently released from prison) as well as “New Arrivals” (illegal immigrants that have moved into the city); a move which Anderson’s claims “will not hurt [the veteran’s department] fiscally.”
For Anderson, it appears that the optics and political ramifications of cutting veterans’ funding are far more important than the act itself.
As she transitioned to the subject of cuts to public safety, which totaled nearly $31,000,000 to the Boston Police Department alone, Anderson defended her council colleagues saying:
“No one in this council, in this body, not one, not the people that talk about police reform…no one wants the police to make less money. I’ve never heard of anyone wanting police to lose their job or be laid off. No one here wants that. I’ve never heard one council colleague express that.”
This statement raises several issues for voters as members of the Boston City Council have a well-documented history of anti-police rhetoric.
Perhaps none stand out more than the Democratic Socialist Kendra Lara, the District 6 Councilor who has gone as far as calling for the abolition of the police.
Lara, a proponent of legitimizing prostitution is no stranger to controversy, the most noticeable of which was the release of a video in which she, naked from the waist down and accompanied by a Boston Public Schools teacher, bragged about having anal sex in front of a young special needs child.
However, following Anderson’s overtly false statements the District 7 official ended her speech by advocating that her council colleagues apply pressure on the Mayor to settle the long overdue contract negotiations with the city’s public safety unions who have been without for several years.
These statements from Anderson raise several questions that we at the Boston Accountability Network (BAN) feel deserve clarification for constituents.
Given Anderson’s own comments, BAN is formally submitting the following questions for clarification:
- How and when, specifically, did you oppose the cuts to funding for the City of Boston’s Department of Veteran Services?
Why did you vote in favor of these budget cuts if you were opposed to them? If there were amendments that outweighed your opposition, what were they and why did you prioritize them over veterans and public safety?
Who, specifically, were you opposing during discussions of these cuts? Who were the most vocal advocates on the Council in favor of slashing funding for public safety and veterans?
Why didn’t you join four of your colleagues by signing onto the below letter addressing these specific cuts if you were opposed to them?
- Why did you say none of your Council colleagues want to see police officers lose their jobs when Councilor Lara has called for defunding and even abolishing their profession?
In this instance, our search for accountability and transparency has resulted in Councilor Anderson illegally and unethically blocking us on social media.
Therefore, and to assist in this process, BAN is asking you to reach out directly to Councilor Anderson and/or her office and urge her to provide constituents with the answers they rightly deserve:
Send an E-Mail to Councilor Anderson by clicking here.
You can reach out to Chief of Staff Kaur here. or by calling (617) 635-3510.
Share:
