Recap: Council Meeting 12/30/2025....A Packed Room, a Loud Crowd, and Three Vetoes on the Line

Tuesday night’s City Council meeting was anything but quiet.... Despite the actual cries from the audience to speak up.

The council chamber was full, with a noticeable turnout of seniors alongside current and former local elected officials. What should have been a routine meeting quickly became chaotic when sound issues made it difficult (and at times impossible) for the audience to hear councilors. The crowd let the Council know, loudly, that poor audio in a room filled with residents trying to follow consequential votes was unacceptable.

Despite the technical problems, public participation was intense, engaged, and overwhelmingly focused on one thing: opposition to overturning all three mayoral vetoes listed on the agenda.

Applause, boos, wooting, and hollering punctuated nearly every public comment. This was not a passive audience.

Speaker after speaker urged councilors not to override the Mayor’s vetoes. The message from the room was remarkably consistent, residents felt the Council was rushing decisions, ignoring fiscal risk, and dismissing public concern.

The energy in the chamber was sustained throughout the meeting, with frequent reactions from the crowd following councilor remarks and votes. Councilors that actually showed up for the meeting in person were definitely disturbed by the action/reaction of the audience.

The Council voted to override the Mayor’s veto related to private and unaccepted roads, with Councilor DiZoglio casting the lone “no” vote.

Special recognition goes to Councilor Nicholas DiZoglio — thank you, Nick.

What This Means....

By overriding the veto, the Council advances a resolution that places pressure on the City to take action on private and unaccepted ways, roads the City does not own and is not obligated to maintain. While the resolution itself does not immediately appropriate funds, it signals policy intent that could expose Methuen to:

• Increased infrastructure expectations

• Future budget pressures

• Legal and liability risks tied to road maintenance and access

The Ethics Problem.... Three of the seven sitting councilors live on private or unaccepted ways, raising serious questions about conflicts of interest.

Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268A, public officials are prohibited from participating in matters where they have a financial or personal interest that could reasonably be seen as influencing their judgment. Even when a technical violation is disputed, the appearance of impropriety standard still applies, especially when votes may benefit an official’s own property.

This issue is not abstract... it is personal, financial, and directly connected to the outcome of the vote.

The attempt to override the Mayor’s veto on the health insurance issue failed, thanks to “no” votes from Councilor Campagnone and Councilor Marsan, who aligned themselves squarely with resident concerns. Thank you both.

Councilor Pesce spent a significant portion of the discussion defending her position and repeatedly sought validation from the Assistant City Solicitor to support her interpretations and statements. The exchange did little to calm the room, which remained visibly frustrated and vocal.

The override attempt related to the Council’s no-confidence in the Superintendent and School Committee vote failed as well, with Councilor Campagnone and Councilor DiZoglio voting no.

What stood out was not just the outcome, but the process. There was little to no substantive discussion before the vote, despite the seriousness of the issue.

Four councilors participated remotely:

1. Councilor Soto

2. Councilor Valley

3. Councilor Campagnone

4. Councilor DiZoglio

Councilor Nick DiZoglio later appeared on camera, clearly ill. Councilor Soto spoke but remained off camera except for a brief appearance. Councilor Valley appeared briefly before disappearing. Councilor Campagnone was never seen on camera at all.

In a meeting already strained by audio failures, the lack of consistent visual participation did not help public confidence... And the room made sure it was known.

Multiple potential Open Meeting Law violations were cited during the meeting. Most notably, at approximately 8:07 p.m., Councilor Soto stated on the record that she had spoken with every councilor about the health insurance issue.

That statement alone raises serious legal questions. We will be reporting this to the Open Meeting Law Department of the Secretary of State office tomorrow. We will keep you posted!

Once the meeting adjourned, no one rushed for the exits. Groups lingered in the chamber and hallways, and in several pockets the conversations grew heated. Residents were visibly upset, councilors were confronted, and the tension in the room lingered well after the final vote.

Bottom Line...

Inside Methuen did get some love tonight from two Councilors for "spreading false information" and "perpetuating a vendetta." Personally, I enjoy that and take it as praise. That tells me what we are doing here is working.

Beyond that... This was not a routine meeting. It was loud, messy, emotional... and deeply revealing.

Residents showed up, spoke out, and made their presence impossible to ignore. Whether the Council heard them ... truly heard them ... remains an open question. But one thing is clear: Methuen is paying attention now....for now.

---

Written By: Dan Shibilia