Peter Pietrantonio

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing Admin and Finance on May 27, 2026, City Council Member Peter Pietrantonio repeatedly pressed department officials on spending, staffing, and potential savings. He opened one exchange by thanking the mayor for attending, then said, “Let’s talk about fixed cost,” and warned that rising fixed costs could leave layoffs as the only practical way to reduce spending without raising taxes. He noted that “every city around us is laying off” and said that if the economy worsens and aid shrinks, “next year could be an entirely different scenario.” He also asked about potential savings through health insurance, GIC, and take-home vehicles, and questioned whether there was anything on the books for unused vacation time.

Pietrantonio also sought clarification on school chargeback money, asking where it goes after returning to the city and whether it flows into the general fund or free cash. In another exchange, he questioned staffing relationships in community development and the tree warden’s office, asking whether the strategy planner assisted the department and whether the tree warden’s workers reported through DPW.

Later, Pietrantonio said, “I’m not going to make any cuts because I don’t want to upset anybody,” but then asked whether there was room to cut the budget and focused on salary and professional line items. He asked if the city could hire someone qualified at $82,000, whether that amount was the top of the range, and where that figure came from. He also revisited the employee buyback account, saying he may have mixed up fiscal years.

On recreation and wellness center staffing, Pietrantonio suggested the city could save money by combining roles and potentially eliminating a position. He said he was “just trying to save money for the taxpayer” and moved to cut the director’s position, while clarifying, “I’m not trying to close the wellness center.” He seconded the motion to cut $105,000 from the salary line item for the assistant director of youth and development. He also moved to excuse a guest “with a customary thanks.”

His voting record in the hearing was: yes on the vacation carryover/unused vacation liability discussion; yes on cutting $105,000 from the assistant director of youth and development salary line item; and yes on accepting the budget as amended.

At the Everett City Council meeting on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, Councilor Peter Pietrantonio spoke on several procedural and substantive questions, and he voted on two recorded matters.

Early in the meeting, Pietrantonio raised a procedural question about whether the rules could be suspended “for favorable action,” while noting that item 3 was “an appointee for the board of appeals.” He also said he had asked whether an earlier study could be used and was told it could not: “We had to do a new study.” In discussing the associated costs, he said the reimbursement could be “under $2,000,000,” and questioned whether the quoted $3,700,000 figure should be reduced because the city would be receiving rent from Encore tenants.

Pietrantonio also pressed for details about a shuttle service, questioning the route, the buses, operating hours, and ridership numbers. He asked whether procurement rules had to be followed and argued that the work should be directed to Everett businesses instead of going out to bid: “I think you should just send it right to the Everett businesses and see if they provide that service, I think you should give them for a shot at it.” He also dismissed Encore’s reported annual contributions as insignificant, saying, “No disrespect, but that’s peanuts,” and added, “I don’t worry about the state. I worry about the city of Everett.”

On a separate matter involving a sidewalk and a structure, he asked, “So you’re building the sidewalk up to try to replace that structure?” He also said, “Well, I mean, it sounds like they both make good points, and I commend Councilor Rogers for her hard work on this,” before urging that the item be returned to committee so the new administration could review it: “But we probably should put it back in committee, and let’s have the new administration sit down with them and look at it again.” He added, “Maybe we can make it tighter,” and acknowledged, “I don’t know, I’m not an expert on data centers, so I can’t comment on that.”

Pietrantonio voted yes on the motion to send the item to committee / the legislative affairs committee. He also voted yes on the motion to enter executive session and adjourn from there. He asked who made the motion and clarified that the vote to send the item back to committee was the first motion and therefore took precedence.

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing on Small Departments on May 20, 2026, Council member Peter Pietrantonio was active throughout the discussion, asking detailed questions on several departmental budgets and proposing changes. He began by greeting staff and praising Dale Palma, saying, “You do a good job down I should say you do a great job down there.” He then asked whether the senior food program came out of the department’s budget and whether it would stop once funding was exhausted, confirming his understanding that “it comes out of our money.”

Pietrantonio opposed the motion to “Accept both department budgets as presented,” and the record shows he voted “no” on that motion. He also asked for clarification after the vote. Later, in discussion of the legal budget, he questioned the proposed deputy city solicitor position. He said he was “not against the position” and liked the idea of getting answers in-house, but he was trying to balance the cost of the position against outside litigation expenses. He pointed to the line item and, noting that only about $80,000 had been spent with two months remaining, recommended cutting the $100,000 request to $50,000. He asked how that would help justify the position to residents.

He also raised questions about IT funding and carryover amounts, asking whether the budget was sufficient to update the system and whether the budget director had an updated carryover number. When told there was approximately “$0.54 million” left over from last year’s budget, he acknowledged the answer and moved on.

Pietrantonio then turned to public health staffing, asking about the youth substance prevention coordinator, whether an adult substance abuse director position had been eliminated, and whether Paul would absorb the responsibilities. He followed up on professional services and professional development, asking why professional services had dropped sharply and whether the increase in nurse training funds reflected actual training.

He also questioned clerk and elections budget details, including the $120,000 figure, the role of an assistant city clerk/city messenger, the separation of the elections office and clerk functions, board membership and vice-chair selection, and whether stipends had always been paid. He later asked who made up the stipend amount and confirmed he intended to reduce it to $3,000 annually. The record shows he voted “yes” on the motion to reduce the reimbursable expenses line item by $11,000 to $33,000.

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing on Schools on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, City Council Member Peter Pietrantonio focused his questioning on enrollment, staffing, and budget returns.

He began by thanking the school officials for appearing and said, “A couple of questions.” He first asked about enrollment trends and whether the district knew “what age group we’re losing in enrollment,” specifically asking whether losing preschool or kindergarten students would affect reimbursement differently than losing high school or senior students. He followed up on that point by asking whether special education status was the only factor that would change reimbursement amounts: “Would that be the only difference if they’re a special Ed student compared to, you know, kindergarten?”

Pietrantonio then shifted to staffing and layoffs. He asked how the budgeted salary line is affected when the district lays off staff who are not ultimately rehired, saying, “So, you have in your budget x amount of teachers. So, now if you lay x amount, you lay everybody off, and you’re certain teachers that you know in your mind you’re not going to hire. What happens to this salary?” In response, he noted the explanation that “No teacher will be laid off because of funding, we have all our funding in place for the staff, how much staff you guys need, all that funding’s in place.” After that exchange, Pietrantonio asked, “So, would that mean last year, two years ago, we were overstaffed?”

He also asked whether special education classes would be included in preschool programming: “So, there’ll be special Ed classes in this preschool?” On facilities and operations, he asked about snow removal, referring to a previous winter problem and asking whether the district would have its own contractors in place. He added, “We can rely on Mr. Moreschi for that?” He remarked that “This is a bad year, it’s the first bad year we had probably in 10, 15 years,” and said people were “kind of a little shocked.”

Near the end of his remarks, Pietrantonio returned to the budget process and asked how much money the school department was returning, stating that other departments are first asked, “how much money are you returning?” No votes were recorded for him during this hearing.

At the Everett City Council meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Council President Peter Pietrantonio took an active role in discussion of the petition concerning work at the park. He raised a procedural and property-ownership question before the council acted, asking, “Just on the motion, how can we approve something if that person doesn’t own the land?” He noted that residents present said they owned the land and pressed the point: “How do we approve this if they own the property and 313 doesn’t?” He asked whether someone could answer the question, indicating uncertainty about how the council could move forward if ownership was disputed.

Pietrantonio also sought clarification on who was requesting the project. He asked, “Who requested this? The city of Everett?” In response, it was explained that the work was for the park and that the project involved bringing power to the park, which currently had no power. After that explanation, Pietrantonio acknowledged the purpose of the work and said, “We’re bringing power to the park. Yep. Alright. Thank you.”

After the discussion, Pietrantonio seconded the motion for favorable action on the petition pending conditions. The council then proceeded to a roll call vote on that favorable-action item, and Pietrantonio voted yes. His comments reflected concern about property authority and clarity about the project’s purpose, while his vote supported moving the matter forward with conditions.

Peter Pietrantonio, City Council President, was present for roll call at the Everett City Council meeting on Monday, April 13, 2026. He opened with a request for a moment of silence, saying, “I’d like to have a moment of silence,” in memory of former Everett employee Dean Gibbs. Pietrantonio noted that Gibbs “worked for the city for over 30 years,” had served as “a superintendent of wire,” and “died at a young age.”

During the meeting, Pietrantonio asked several questions and raised concerns about multiple agenda items. In discussion of a project involving utility poles, he asked, “Did you say that all these polls are going in for one building for 134 units?” and followed up on the project scope by asking, “It goes from Charleston to Broadway.” He also asked, “How long have these plans been in place?” When the council discussed an item related to staffing and reclassification, Pietrantonio asked, “Did we eliminate any jobs with this?” and then sought clarification: “Okay. So no director is letting go with what we’re just changing titles, but these are new jobs,” adding that “we didn’t cut any positions out of these departments.” He also asked about the FY27 budget and whether positions were being cut, and at one point asked, “You don’t know that answer?”

Pietrantonio made a motion “to send it to the committee” on the item under consideration, and later seconded “the motion” to take item number 32 from the calendar. He voted yes on both recorded votes: opening public participation and taking item 32 from the calendar.

He also spoke forcefully during a licensing discussion, saying, “My concern is banning the nips.” Pietrantonio said his family had owned a liquor store in Everett for 40 years and hoped to keep it for another 40, arguing, “I don’t think the businesses should be punished because people are pigs.” He urged the council to “keep the business in mind” and later cautioned, “Please don’t give them the license to be open at 01:00,” referring to a bar with “black[ed]-out windows.” He added that residents in his ward “complain about that bar constantly.”

Pietrantonio also made lighter remarks, including welcoming a colleague and responding jokingly during discussion.

At the Everett Special City Council meeting on Thursday, April 9, 2026, City Council President Peter Pietrantonio focused much of his remarks on the assistant city clerk position and the office arrangement for that role. He asked, “How long has the assistant city clerk been in the budget or been in effect?” and followed up by asking, “We’ve had an assistant city clerk since then?” He also raised a question about logistics, asking where the assistant city clerk’s office would be located.

Pietrantonio made clear that he did not want a repeat of the staffing changes he said had caused problems in prior years. He stated, “We’re not gonna shuffle anyone around like we did the last two years and kinda made us …” and added, “I don’t wanna have it a circus down there with, you know, what happened the last two years.” He then voiced agreement with Mr. Matewsky, saying, “And I agree with Mr. Matewsky, should be downstairs and I just hope that happens.”

During the discussion, Pietrantonio described both candidates for the position favorably. He said, “And to either candidate, two great candidates, both of them. I know them both personally, and good luck to both of them.” He concluded that portion of his remarks with, “That’s it. Thank you.”

Pietrantonio also made a formal nomination during the meeting, stating, “I nominate Caryn Antonelli.” No roll call votes or recorded votes attributed to him were included in the extracted activity for this meeting. His participation was therefore centered on questioning the setup of the assistant city clerk position, expressing a preference that the role remain downstairs in the clerk’s office, and publicly supporting the candidates involved.

At the Everett Committee on Ways and Means meeting on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, Peter Pietrantonio actively questioned the proposed school-related feasibility work and the financing behind it. Early in the discussion, he seconded the motion before turning to the substance of the item, asking, “Why does it say high school?” He pressed for clarification on the scope of the proposal, asking whether the committee was talking about “elementary schools, everything” and whether the city was looking at how to shuffle students around or identify “what building we can take to knock down, to put a high school.”

Pietrantonio also asked whether there was already “a high school feasibility study” on record and whether the committee was being pointed to a specific location for a new high school. When informed that the Massachusetts School Building Authority would help determine the options, he asked, “MSBA, is that a federal state run?” and then sought clarification on reimbursement levels, asking whether the same agency would tell the city if it would receive “60%, 80%, 90% of reimbursement” depending on whether the city pursued another elementary school or an 8-to-9 grade configuration.

A major theme of his comments was concern about borrowing. He asked, “Where are we borrowing this money from?” and said, “What scares me, borrowing. That word borrowing.” He referenced the city’s recent debt, stating, “We just borrowed $44,000,000 for the school,” and added, “I mean, borrowing is scary.” He then asked whether the city could handle the borrowing burden.

Pietrantonio also sought confirmation that the study covered “every single school in the city of Everett” and asked whether the work included the possibility of renovating the old high school, including Pope John, noting, “This includes renovating and everything. Correct?” Toward the end of the discussion, he asked the administration to keep both the council and the public updated as the process moved forward and suggested returning in three months with an update. He also asked what frequency the council wanted for those updates.

No roll call votes were recorded for Pietrantonio in the meeting notes provided. He did move to excuse customary thanks and later moved to adjourn the meeting.

At the Everett Ways and Means Committee meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Council President Peter Pietrantonio spoke on the Chelsea Street Park renovation appropriation request for $1,326,928. He proposed delaying committee action, saying, “I’d like to refer this to our next council meeting, and the planning board, I’d wait for the final approval of the master plan that the city is developing.” His position was that the item should not move forward until the city’s master plan was fully approved.

Pietrantonio made the motion to refer the appropriation request to the next city council meeting with a recommendation that the planning board return with the completed master plan. The motion was supported in the record by his statement and then carried by vote. Pietrantonio voted “aye” on the referral motion.

He also participated in the meeting’s closing action. Pietrantonio seconded the motion to adjourn and again voted “aye” when the committee took the adjournment vote. The adjournment motion passed.

Across the meeting, Pietrantonio’s comments reflected a cautious procedural approach to the park renovation request: rather than advancing the appropriation immediately, he emphasized waiting for the city’s broader planning process to reach final approval. His only recorded substantive statement on the item was his preference to defer action until the master plan was complete. No other questions or objections from him were captured in the extracted record.

At the April 13, 2026 Ways and Means Committee meeting, City Council President Peter Pietrantonio was active on several funding and placement items. He began by seconding a motion related to the audit appropriation and then asked, “Can we invite the chief financial officer up?” Once the CFO was present, he pressed for basic clarification: “This is a totally different audit company from previous audits?” and asked whether the work had to “go out to bid.” He also challenged the funding math, saying, “So, if we get $98,000 in there, the audit’s going to cost us $107,000,” and questioned whether enough money already existed in the line item. After some back-and-forth, he said, “I mean, I feel that we should give them the $9,000, and if they need additional money, they can come back like they’re doing now.”

Pietrantonio also moved to bring the superintendent of water before the committee and questioned a request for additional funding late in the year. “Explain to me why we have got 3.5 months left in this year’s budget, why do we need $150,000?” he asked, adding that he had “a hard time giving you $150,000.” He asked about a possible sewer collapse, where it occurred, and whether development in the area was contributing to the problem. He also asked whether money could be shifted within the department and whether an emergency could still be handled without the requested appropriation.

He voted yes on the motion to invite the chief administrative financial officer before the committee. He also voted yes on the amendment to bring the appropriation to $12,000 / $110,000 total, and yes to reduce the amended version of $107,000 down to $12,000. He voted yes to excuse the guest.

On the advertising appropriation, however, Pietrantonio was opposed. He said, “I will vote it down,” and argued, “I think we should give independent their fair share,” adding, “Personally, I think we should give advocate nothing, not a dime.” He voted no on favorable action for the advertising money. Before a later vote, he asked for clarification on the Bluebike station location, saying he wanted to know “exactly where it’s going” and “I’d like to see it first.”

At the Everett Government Operations meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Council President Peter Pietrantonio took an active role in the National Grid petition discussion. He moved to invite the petitioner up and seconded the motion, bringing the matter before the committee.

Pietrantonio focused his questions on the practical impact of the work on Broadway and nearby residents. He asked about the trench and manhole placement, including where the manholes would sit relative to the roadway, curb, gutter line, and centerline. He also noted, “The manholes are in the center of the road,” and asked how far apart the manholes would be.

A major line of inquiry concerned the construction schedule. Pietrantonio asked, “What what is the work hours? That’s that’s that’s a big that’s gonna that’s a big issue. What are the work hours?” He also asked whether nighttime work was possible. When the timeline was discussed, he sought clarification, saying, “Yeah. A question. What about, equipment?” and later repeated his understanding of the duration, asking, “Yeah. Did you say a year?” and then, “Seven weeks? Did I hear that right?” When the response indicated “Months,” he acknowledged it with, “Okay. Alright. Thank you.”

Pietrantonio also pressed for a plan on how equipment would be staged, asking whether it would be left in front of houses and requesting that the petitioner present the plan to the board or engineering department. He said such a plan would help “calm residents down.” He further confirmed expectations about paving and temporary pavement as work progressed up Broadway.

On the floor, Pietrantonio voted yes to excuse the guest with customary thanks. He then moved to adjourn, and voted yes on the adjournment motion as well.