While Charter Panel Takes Notes—

Council Weighs In On Balance Of Power

By Steve Bigham

The Charter Revision Commission got an earful from the Legislative Council last week during a two-hour meeting on the current town charter. The council provided a variety of viewpoints on current government issues, helping the charter panel as it continues to contemplate change.

“They certainly gave us a lot to work with,” noted charter panel Chairman Bill Sheluck.

During the meeting, some council members called for wholesale changes in town government. One or two even suggested the town scrap the first selectman position in favor of a town manager, while others called for a stronger first selectman. Some favored a Board of Finance and some called for the elimination of the Board of Selectmen. Others, however, questioned if the current form of government really required any major change.

“I don’t think what we have is broken. I think we’d get a lot further with tweaking,” suggested council member John Kortze. “Most of the things that come up are petty, not mechanical or structural problems. We need to work on improving the existing government. We can make it work the way it is right now.”

But, in a revealing statement last week, Mr Sheluck made it clear that his board is concerned about what he called an “imbalance of power” between the executive and legislative branches of the town government. He indicated that the charter panel was leaning toward suggesting a strong mayor/council or selectman form of government and favored the elimination of the Board of Selectmen. He also presented the idea of giving the first selectman veto power over certain council votes.

“What I tried to do was get everything out on table that we had talked about so that the council got a chance to respond to all the issues,” Mr Sheluck explained. “The Legislative Council has the say on most final decisions.

The thought of a more powerful first selectman is frightening to longtime council member Melissa Pilchard. She advocates the creation of a town manager form of government.

“I think the first selectmen are untrained and untried and they are only there for a few years,” she said, pointing out that town managers are college-trained in public administration.

Mrs Pilchard said it takes two years for a first selectman to figure out how the whole thing works and another two years for the “God Complex” to develop. This was an apparent criticism of Newtown’s various first selectmen over the years who, in her opinion, have taken tougher stands during their second terms.

The majority of the council, however, believes the town manager approach is the wrong way to go. This sentiment also appears to be held by members of the Charter Revision Commission who believe the town is not ready to absorb such a major change.

“Newtown doesn’t move with the times too quickly,” noted council member Will Rodgers.

Don Studley indicated his support for a Board of Finance – a group he believes would be more focused on financial issues.

“We ought to have a group that’s interested in nothing but finances,” he said.

Mr Studley was a member of the 1975 Charter Revision Commission, which created the Legislative Council and effectively eliminated the Board of Finance that had existed previously. “We didn’t think of the consequences of that decision and 25 years later I regret it,” he said.

Joe Borst agreed. “The Board of Finance would work well with the Legislative Council and the council could deny or approve the board’s recommendation. Then the first selectman can veto the council’s decision,” he said.

But what would the Legislative Council do if a Finance Board was created? Mrs Pilchard wondered. Ordinances and other smaller tasks, she was told.

“If we had a finance board, a strong first selectman and a referendum still intact, has anyone considered getting rid of the council?” Tim Holian asked.

Sure, some replied, suggesting that the first selectman could handle the creation of ordinances.

As for adding or reducing the number of council members, most said it should remain at 12. The strongest personalities will dominate the workings of a smaller board, Mr Holian said. With a larger board, “we’d still be deliberating the purchase of a patrol car,” he added.

Last week’s meeting also dealt with the issue of whether or not to elect council members “by district” or “at-large.” Some feel “by-district” voting creates difficulties because some districts have more candidates to choose from than others. Others say the town is too big for door-to-door campaigning, which would require a townwide canvassing under an “at large” system.

Mr Studley said electing council members “by district” makes no sense. “The way the districts are set up makes it ineffective. I don’t think there are many district issues, maybe neighborhood issues, but certainly those issues can be resolved by an ‘at-large’ council,”

There was also some discussion about the council’s ability to add money to a budget. That is often the case with departments such as the library, where representatives, having been turned down by the selectmen, then state their case to the full council. Many council members agree that the council should only be allowed to cut the budget, not add to it.

Resident Betty Lincoln suggested that allowing the council to increase the budget provides an “end run” for when the selectmen refuse a budget item. It provides an appeal process, she said.

“I thought [the council] was pretty well thought out and quite forthcoming about their opinions,” noted charter board member Jane Sharpe. “We did have a lot of consensus on some things. They seemed to prefer to eliminate the Board of Selectmen even though they were complimentary about all three selectmen.

At the end of the meeting, resident K. Michael Snyder suggested that it was time for the town’s political parties to get rid of the “old-boy system” and put up two people for every position.

“We need to add independents. We need some fresh blood,” he said.