Holyoke may drop an elected office this week. (WMP&I)

The last time voters in the City of Holyoke had to trudge to the polls in the dead of winter was probably 2010. On January 19 that year, city residents and those in the other 350 communities of Massachusetts voted to fill the seat of the late Edward Kennedy. While state law dictated that that election occur, this Tuesday’s special election for a referendum is a decision the Paper City made.

Well, sorta.

City voters will decide January 28 whether to make the city’s treasurer appointed rather than elected. The ballot question’s mid-winter timing is an accident of the calendar. State practice disfavors local questions on state elections and ballot papers for city offices—including the treasurer—will become available next month. However, if voters approve the measure, it would nudge Holyoke toward a consolidation in fiscal management state and local officials have long sought.

Governor Maura Healey signed a special act on December 19 that officially forwarded the question to Holyoke voters.

For a decade now, the Holyoke Treasurer’s office has been something of a revolving door. Elected treasurers have departed, leaving other electeds appointing replacements anyway. In a statement announcing the campaign last month, the current treasurer urged voters to end that cycle.

Treasurer Rory Casey asks voters to cash out his office. (via holyoke.org)

“I’m the fourth elected treasurer over the past ten years, and I hope I’m the last,” Treasurer Rory Casey said. “Most politicians run campaigns asking voters to be hired. Instead, I’m asking the voters to fire me. The reason is simple: our city deserves a better system.”

For years now, Holyoke has debated whether to consolidate fiscal and budgetary functions. Voters rejected a 2015 measure to let the Council appoint the treasurer rather than have the office subject to election by voters.

That year it was one of four charter changes before voters, some of which may have attracted more attention. Voters greenlighted a four-year mayoral term and shrinking the City Council by two seats. They rejected the treasurer change and a question allowing four-year Council terms.

Holyoke is among the few that still elect several executive offices beyond the mayor. This is largely due to the age of its charter. Mid-nineteenth century charters often endowed the executive among other offices, partly to dilute power and provide accountability via the ballot box.

This began to change as municipal governance evolved and especially in the realm of municipal finance.  For example, cities like Northampton and Springfield have undergone whole charter changes in the last century. That gave the power to appoint financial officers to the mayor or the mayor’s appointees. Chicopee and Holyoke, whose charters are twins but have undergone changes independently over decades, retain elected treasurers.

This has not been without controversy in Chicopee. Yet, Holyoke has historically faced more fiscal distress than Chicopee since deindustrialization and suburbanization began in earnest. State law has also evolved to give mayors with actual power—as opposed to ceremonial power as in Worcester—greater oversight of fiscal and administrative matters.

Holyoke avoided the fiscal crises Springfield experienced 20 years ago. Still, the mayor’s limited control over finances—despite having budgetary power under state law—has prompted state officials to push for consolidation.

Like the 2015 measure, the question on Tuesday would make the treasurer an appointee of the City Council. However, the appointment would be subject to qualifications laid out in ordinance.

Nothing in the state constitution requires the city to ask voters for a charter change. Holyoke had debated whether it needed to do so. Springfield did not hold a referendum when it changed the charter to allow special elections for vacancies in the City Council’s ward seats. The Holyoke City Council decided during its debate on the home rule petition to seek a referendum.

The original plan to hold it during the election last November hit a speed bump. State law only allows certain questions on state election ballots, such as the Community Preservation Act assessment reduction which Holyoke itself had on the ballot. Massachusetts generally bars charter amendments on state ballots. That said, Holyoke had always planned to ask the legislature for the ballot question, which could have overridden this rule.

That was unlikely to happen, however. A spokesperson for Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin told WMP&I last month that since 2010, the office has discouraged including local questions on federal ballots. This would ensure the state could meet federal requirements for ballots go out 45 days before an election. Furthermore, the ballot would have been three pages. That would complicate tabulation, increase mailing costs and raise issues should ballots be missing pages.

Holding it during a state election would have been a departure from other Holyoke ballot questions. They have usually occurred in municipal election years. The problem is Holyoke would be due to hold its treasurer election this year anyway. January 28 ended up being the latest the vote could occur, receive voter approval and provide enough time to remove the office from forms candidates file to run.

On January 9, Treasurer Casey, Mayor Joshua Garcia, City Council President Tessa Murphy-Romboletti, State Rep Patricia Duffy and other officials appeared at a press conference to support the question’s passage.

“What makes this effort unique is that it actually has the unanimous support of the city council. There are not many issues that we agree on completely, but this is one of them,” Murphy-Romboletti said. For her, the measure would remove politics from municipal finance and put it in the hands of a professional.

Garcia, a professional municipal manager prior to becoming mayor, said enhancing expertise and accountability had been a focus of his and the Council during his term. Specifically, he said it would contribute to strengthening internal controls.

Indeed, Casey, speaking at the press conference, cited reports from the state inspector general and Division of Local services that called for consolidation of financial offices in the city. He also noted a phishing scheme that cost the city $10,000.

It is not clear how much opposition exists to the question this time. One argument circulating on social media is a lack of trust in the City Council to choose a competent treasurer.

Murphy-Romboletti said the Council’s selection process would mirror what it does for the tax collector and the assessor. The Personnel Office would post the position. The Council would then interview candidates and choose a treasurer. As a practical matter, the mayor would have day-to-day oversight.

Ultimately, Casey offered the most colorful plea in favor of the question, which featured prominently in headlines after the January 9 press conference. He acknowledged that, like other pols, he had once stood before voters and asked them to hire him.

“I’m a little bit different,” he said. “I’m standing here in front of the voters saying ‘Please fire me!’”