Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oversight Audit Legal Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget standoff: Everett council, mayor clash over council’s request for funds tied to OIG recommendations
Summary
A dispute over $200,000 the council requested to pursue outside legal counsel and forensic audit work prompted rancor at the budget hearing. The mayor’s office reduced the council’s request to $10,000; council leaders say the cut hampers ongoing work to respond to an Inspector General report.
The Everett City Council’s effort to secure $200,000 to fund outside legal counsel and a forensic audit tied to recommendations from the state Office of Inspector General (OIG) ended with the mayor recommending only $10,000 and a contentious debate at the May 21 budget hearing.
Council President Martins said the council requested $200,000 “to comply with OIG’s recommendations requesting an audit” and to retain private legal counsel to evaluate potential recovery or other legal steps after an OIG report. Martins told fellow councilors the work is ongoing: “We’re building a case. It takes time.”
Mayor Carlo DeMaria told the committee the mayor’s office reduced the request. Finance staff confirmed the reduction was the mayor’s decision; council members said they were not consulted on that change and described the move as retaliatory after council actions earlier in the year.
The council debated whether the OIG’s investigatory report required the council to fund independent outside work. City administration representatives said the mayor’s office retained executive authority over appropriations; council leaders said the OIG specifically asked the council to report on steps it would take, and they had begun work that will require additional funding beyond the $10,000 allotment.
At the hearing, councilors also voted on the city council’s own operating budget and repeatedly returned to the question of legal funds. A motion related to the council’s budget produced procedural confusion at the committee level and a subsequent motion for reconsideration; ultimately the committee’s recommendation on the council budget moved forward to the full council.
Why it matters: The disagreement ties to an OIG report that recommended action; council leaders say they need funds to pursue independent review and possible recovery of funds or to otherwise satisfy OIG recommendations. The dispute underscores the separation between executive fiscal authority and the council’s desire for independent review.
What was decided: The mayor reduced the council’s request to $10,000 in the recommended budget; the committee discussed but did not restore the larger request. Council leaders said they will pursue remedies at the full‑council level and seek further appropriations if necessary.
What to watch: Whether the full City Council votes to override the committee recommendation, and whether the council secures supplemental appropriations to complete the forensic audit and legal review.
Sources: Council President Martins; Mayor Carlo DeMaria; budget documents and roll‑call motions on May 21, 2025.
