Stephanie Martins

Councilor Matt Martins was active throughout the Everett City Council Budget Hearing for Admin and Finance on May 27, 2026, using most of his time to ask detailed budget and staffing questions and to respond to departmental presentations. Early in the hearing, he supported the format of the budget materials, saying, “I love the uniform sizes because we don’t need a half a page for something that could be a quarter page.” He also asked whether the reported $13 million health insurance figure included school personnel and clarified, “So, the city covers the?” Martins later offered direct praise to the mayor, saying, “At the very least, he’s a Mayor that will show up to work, and you’ve been honoring that, and we appreciate it.”

Martins repeatedly raised questions about staffing, salaries, and administrative structure. He asked whether departments were returning any funds, what languages staff could cover, whether new technologies and the online portal would be updated, and whether a police app could be used for 311-style requests. He questioned a salary reduction on the community engagement policy line, asked whether the replacement employee was performing the same functions as the prior employee, and pressed on whether CDBG and National Group funds were disclosed in the budget amounts. He also asked about tree warden support, tuition reimbursement, affordable housing staffing, professional services, workers’ compensation outsourcing, and employee development. In one exchange, he stated he was “very excited to have a full HR person with your type of background and training.”

Martins also used the hearing to raise broader policy concerns. He said the city needs “somebody with actual experience in running diverse businesses” to better relate to Everett’s population and support economic development. He argued that CDBG salary savings should be repurposed to fund organizations directly, and said he highly encouraged the city to better understand what those organizations provide. On another matter, he explained that he would vote no on a $105,000 salary cut because the director position was still uncertain and the interim structure had not been resolved.

Votes recorded for Martins included yes on the motion to invite Ms. Lamboy, yes to accept the department’s budget as presented, yes to invite Mrs. Collins, yes to accept the budget as presented, no on the motion to cut $105,000 from the assistant director of youth and development salary line item, and yes to excuse the guest with a customary thanks.

At the May 26, 2026 Everett City Council meeting, Council Member Stephanie Martins participated actively across several agenda items, both by seconding motions and by raising substantive questions and concerns.

Early in the meeting, Martins seconded the motion to close public participation, then later seconded favorable-action motions on items 17 and 18, item 22, items 4 and 5, items 6 through 10, and items 19 and 21. She also seconded the motion to invite the Encore Boston Harbor representative, and later voted yes on the motion to enter executive session and adjourn from there. In each case, the motions carried.

In the Encore discussion, Martins said her concerns had “already been addressed by my colleagues,” and framed the purpose of the invitation as an effort “to reestablish this relationship between Encore and the city.” She emphasized that the council wanted Encore to “become part of Everett,” and urged more connection with local businesses. She asked about the transportation investment, specifically whether the stops covered areas such as Everett Square, Market Basket, and Route 16. She also asked for the current percentage of Encore employees who are Everett residents, requested regular updates on employment numbers and community investments, and said the council would “love to have regular updates” and invitations to Encore events. Martins further raised prior email concerns involving bridge construction, security, host agreement issues, and a traffic light matter, identifying Encore’s representative as the follow-up point person.

Later, on a parking and redevelopment item, Martins noted she had met with Mayor Van Campen before the public meeting and asked why the city was spending $5,000,000, then asked what the current figure was after the amount had been reduced. She asked whether parking spaces would be removed, and raised the possibility of funding and building “an actual garage” in the future. She supported Councilor Nguyen’s comment about a public restroom, citing reports of public defecation, urination, and related problems affecting the library and nearby businesses.

On the zoning/data center item, Martins clarified for the public that the council was “not” voting on a data center itself, but changing zoning to limit uses and require any such facility to “look a certain way.” She said the community did not want to be “an industrial background for other cities,” and said she was ready to support Councilor Rogers’ motion to move the matter forward.

Stephanie Martins participated actively throughout the Everett City Council Budget Hearing (Small Departments), asking questions, offering praise, and making motions on budget items. She began with a positive assessment of a department’s work, saying, “Always excited to see the programs you have,” and noting that “The seniors are so active.” She also asked about staffing and a proposed $10,000 increase, wanting to know whether it represented “new services” and emphasizing that she wanted to ensure staff were “actually getting paid for the things that they’re doing.” She thanked the official for both military and city service, but also raised a concern about compensation, saying she found it “disrespectful” that the veteran’s salary was the department’s lowest paid department-head position and warning that low pay makes it hard to retain younger employees.

Martins then supported an added legal position while questioning how outside counsel would be handled once funded. She referenced prior reductions to outside counsel, said she saw the benefit of the additional position because of high spending on outside firms, and asked whether, once money was appropriated, the department could retain firms and sign contracts without council being told which firms were being retained. She also cited the ordinance requiring council oversight of retained counsel and invoices.

During other department presentations, Martins asked about the IT department’s 2027 goals and how it would make Everett “one of the healthiest cities in America.” She also asked the clerk’s office what an “RAO stipend” is, why it was being increased, about overtime, and what the new FOIA program was. She praised the historical commission partnership and commended staff for their work with the community.

On elections, Martins applauded the continuation and expansion of the student poll worker program and supported a salary increase tied to retention. She raised concerns about board members not showing up and said she hoped the elections director would be able to ensure elections continue “without you.”

On motions, Martins moved to invite the IT department representative, and later moved to reduce the legislative aide line item by $10,000. She then moved to accept the budget as presented, but after asking what a failed acceptance vote would mean, she rescinded that motion. The extracted vote record shows she voted “yes” on reducing salary lines by $10,000 and “yes” on accepting the budget as presented.

At the Everett City Council Budget Hearing on Schools on May 19, 2026, Stephanie Martins opened by making a motion “to invite the superintendent and any members of the administration who’ll be presenting tonight.” She then took an active role in questioning the school budget, with a particular focus on special education costs, staffing changes, and how budget decisions were made.

Martins said, “As far as the special education expenditures, I know that the transportation budget is a big chunk of that,” and asked, “Are we becoming more innovative in how we’re addressing special education needs?” She followed up by asking whether more students were being identified as needing special needs and, if so, “Why?” No votes were recorded from her during the hearing.

She also sought clarification on financial procedures, asking, “Could you explain what the chargebacks are and how they’re paid back and when to the city?” Later, she turned to proposed staffing and program reductions, saying she was “just curious as to how the programs are going to continue to run” in light of cuts she saw in the budget. She specifically noted the elimination of data department salaries and asked what that position had done and “who’s keeping your data now.”

Martins also questioned the elimination or repurposing of several roles, including the coordinator of ABA, the director of excellence access and opportunity, the manager of security, and legal counsel. She noted that security had been listed among the district’s priorities and asked how the district was functioning without legal counsel, or whether the role had been repurposed under another title.

On instructional spending, she pointed to “K through 8 ELA supplies going down from $232,000 to $86,000” and asked for confirmation that reductions were driven by declining enrollment rather than being shifted elsewhere. She also asked, more broadly, how the district’s budget was designed and whether decisions were made by administration in a process similar to the city’s department-head and finance review. Throughout the hearing, Martins thanked the presenters, praised their work, and thanked the educators and staff in attendance.

At the Everett City Council meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Councilor Stephanie Martins was active on the floor during consideration of the National Grid petition involving underground facilities on Chalton Street and Broadway.

Martins began by seconding the motion to invite the petitioner up. She then moved to close the public hearing, stating, “Motion to close the public hearing.” That motion was seconded, and Martins voted yes on the roll call to close the hearing. She also seconded a later motion to close the public hearing again when the matter was taken up in the meeting record.

After the hearing closed, Martins made the motion for “favorable action” on the National Grid petition. The motion was seconded, and she voted yes on the roll call for the favorable-action item. Her vote was recorded in support of the petition for underground facilities on Chalton Street and Broadway.

Later in the discussion, Martins made another procedural motion: “And a motion to refer the item to the planning board.” She repeated and clarified the motion after an interruption, saying, “I’m sorry. I saw you. No. Okay. And a motion to refer the item to the planning board.” This exchange indicates she was attempting to advance the item procedurally by sending it to the planning board for further review.

Across the meeting, Martins’s actions were focused on managing the petition’s process: she seconded motions, closed the public hearing, supported favorable action, and then sought referral to the planning board. She did not raise substantive objections in the extracted record, but she did take a clear procedural position through her motions and recorded yes votes.

At the April 13, 2026 Everett City Council meeting, Councilor Stephanie Martins made several public remarks, introduced a ceremonial citation, and spoke on multiple ordinances and referrals.

She began by apologizing, saying, “First, I want to apologize for taking the dog to work on a day.” She then presented a citation recognizing the fifth anniversary of WaybetterU fitness studio at 153 B Main Street in Santana Plaza, describing it as an organization that has “proudly served the community for the past five years” with “accessible, inclusive fitness and health programs for individuals of all ages and backgrounds.” Martins noted that Sam has “been serving the community since 2009,” invited him to the podium, and asked council members, family, and the team to come up for a photo.

On the agenda item concerning wage theft prevention, Martins moved for favorable action and then moved to suspend the rules and take item 32 from the calendar. The council voted yes on suspending the rules. Martins defended the ordinance, saying, “Only businesses committing fraud and wage theft should be concerned about this ordinance,” and that it would give the city the ability to reject contractors who violate wage laws and fail to pay residents. She added, “Are we in favor of wage theft? We’re not,” and thanked union members present. She later reported, “Unfortunately, we did have an issue with the ordinance being advertised,” and moved to postpone the amended ordinance to the next council meeting. The council voted yes on postponement.

Martins also questioned a speaker during a commission-related discussion, saying the commission was important to her because of “economic development” and asking for the speaker’s vision for business hours and how businesses should operate in Everett. She said the city had been dealing with “over-enforcement” and that it should support business growth while keeping neighborhoods and clients safe.

In a separate discussion, Martins seconded a motion and asked that information Councilor Rogers requested be provided, including how many positions are vacancies or open. On the data center issue, she said she had reached out on March 4 to representatives before the compromise was written, criticized the lack of collaboration, and supported bringing back a complete ban if cooperation did not occur.

Before adjournment, Martins announced a free city-state event at the Rec Center on the 28th at 3:30 for contractors and business owners. She then moved to adjourn.

At the Everett Legislative Affairs meeting on Monday, April 27, 2026, City Councilor Stephanie Martins participated briefly in the formal proceedings. Her recorded activity consisted of a single procedural action: she seconded a motion. No vote was attributed to her in the extracted record, and no substantive remarks, questions, or policy positions were captured.

Martins’ only quoted statement was, “Second.” This indicates she provided the required second to move the item forward for consideration by the committee. The record does not identify which specific motion she seconded, nor does it include any follow-up discussion from her after doing so. Based on the available meeting data, her role in this session was limited to supporting the procedural handling of business rather than offering extended comment or debate.

Because no votes were logged for Martins in the extracted activity, there is no record here of her voting stance on any measure considered during the meeting. Likewise, there is no evidence in the available transcript that she raised questions, stated concerns, or advocated for a particular outcome on any legislative matter.

In summary, Martins’ documented participation in this meeting was concise and procedural. She seconded a motion by saying, “Second,” and otherwise did not have any additional recorded contributions in the extracted data.

At the Everett Legislative Affairs Meeting on Monday, April 13, 2026, City Councilor Stephanie Martins participated in the committee’s discussion of appointments and procedural motions.

Martins first seconded Anthony DiPierro’s motion to reconsider. She then voted yes on the motion to refer the Samuel Fern appointment to the full body with no recommendation. The committee also discussed the Antonio Cornelio appointment. During that exchange, Martins stated, “I don’t see him in the audience, but he’s definitely a well-known person that I personally would like to make a favorable recommendation back to the body on.” Her comment signaled clear support for advancing the appointment favorably.

Martins then seconded the favorable action motion on the Antonio Cornelio appointment and voted yes on it. When the discussion turned to whether additional information should be gathered before the main meeting, she asked, “Yes. Could we do a favorable action with a recommendation that we get those answers by the next meeting, by the main meeting?” That question reflected her preference for moving the appointment forward while still requesting follow-up answers by the next meeting.

At the end of the meeting, Martins seconded the motion to adjourn and voted yes on adjournment.

Votes recorded for Martins:

• Refer the Samuel Fern appointment to the full body with no recommendation — yes
• Favorable action on the Antonio Cornelio appointment — yes
• Adjourn the meeting — yes

Overall, Martins supported procedural consideration of the appointments, backed a favorable recommendation for Antonio Cornelio, and sought a path that would allow the committee to request remaining answers without delaying action.