There has been much discussion about whether Framingham should remain a "town" or become a "city" and honestly, in my mind, I am having a hard time coming to terms with either. Even though I do think that the Town Meeting format has some merit, what has happened to me, my brother and other conservative people bothers me. We are a minority. At the most, I would think that of the 120 who show up at Town Meeting, you might have 30, who are considered conservatives and really interested in our town budget. The rest - more liberal - have their own agenda, which benefits THEM. And as such, over the last several years, our voices are ignored or even censored.

I feel that in a "city" form of government, I would at least be able to have a voice at the city council meetings, whereas now, even as a TMM, I have no voice, and especially if I am voted out of Town Meeting. So in regards to the "city," although I am not happy with the idea of a "city" government (too much power seemingly consolidated in the hands of a few though that is the case with Town Meeting anyway), I really don't think that a city government would be any different. I suspect that like the Town Meeting, the city would be equally unwilling to deal with the prominent issues, particularly with regard to the biggest problem we have had in this town - illegal immigration, (the proverbial elephant in the room) which NO ONE wants to address.

I have a lot of things to consider regarding the argument, city vs. town - either one - it all comes down to representation and the fact that I myself would likely have more of a voice. It seems the "city" would be a better bet only because they would be meeting more often. For me, "town" form of government has failed. I've been marginalized and censored. So, I'm leaning more towards the choice of a "city." It can't be any worse than the town structure is now. Although they want us to think it's functioning perfectly fine, really it is not or we wouldn't be considering a "city."

Jim Rizoli

Framingham Town Meeting member