Mayor Robert J. Van Campen put out a statement this week responding to an Order to Show Cause from the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission, and the city’s message is pretty straightforward: this appears to be about longevity payments from the prior administration, and the state is alleging they were not handled legally.
Van Campen said he is aware of the order issued April 29 and called the allegations “serious.” His statement says the Ethics Commission’s findings “raise significant concerns about the improper use of public office, taxpayer funds and a lack of transparency.”
That is city-hall language, but the important part is not hard to translate. The state is not talking about a paperwork typo. According to the mayor’s statement, the commission alleges “certain longevity payments violated the state ethics law because they were improperly received and some of those payments were concealed.”
Improperly received. Concealed. Those are the words the city itself chose to highlight.
Van Campen also said, “These findings should concern anyone who expects an accountable government.” Fair enough. Everett spent years dealing with the public cost of old-fashioned grift politics dressed up as normal business. If state investigators are now moving into formal proceedings over compensation issues tied to the prior administration, that matters.
It matters for one obvious reason: working people in Everett do not get to quietly pad their own pay with public money and then call it a misunderstanding. They get a shutoff notice, a rent increase, or a tax bill. City officials should be held to at least that standard.
The mayor’s statement does not name individuals and does not lay out the underlying payment history. It does confirm that the Ethics Commission has moved beyond rumor and into a formal adjudicatory process. The city says a public hearing is expected.
That means this is no longer just whispered talk about what happened under the last administration. There is now an official state process, a published order, and the possibility of testimony and records coming into public view.
Van Campen said, “The City of Everett is reviewing the findings closely and will continue to follow the process as it moves forward.” He also said, “there is no place in Everett for the misuse of taxpayer dollars or the use of public office for personal gain.”
That is the easy part to say. The harder part is what comes next.
Will the administration release more detail about what payments are at issue, who approved them, and whether Everett taxpayers will ever be made whole if the state’s allegations are sustained? Will city hall simply point backward at the prior administration, or will it show residents exactly what safeguards are now in place so this does not happen again?
Those are the useful questions. Not the performative kind. The money either went where it should have or it did not.
For now, what we have from the city is a statement acknowledging the seriousness of the order and promising to monitor the case. The public hearing, whenever it happens, should tell us more than a carefully polished press release ever will.