Council Delivers Harsh Critique Of Charter Proposals

By Steve Bigham

The Charter Revision Commission may need to research how to deal with rejection following its regular meeting last week. The Legislative Council was on hand to hear the rationale behind the commission’s proposed charter changes and promptly shot down almost everything on the list.

Only halfway through its overall study of the town charter, the charter panel has attracted widespread and keen interest in its work for the large-scale changes it has proposed for town government. Many of the proposed changes would have a direct impact on the Legislative Council.

The council created the Charter Revision Commission and is empowered to turn down any of its proposed changes. And if last week’s meeting was any indication, those proposed changes will be defeated before ever reaching the electorate.

At the top of the list is the commission’s proposal to give more authority to the first selectman and to create a board of finance to address financial matters. Those proposed changes simply will not do, say many council members, although only half were present at last week’s meeting.

Legislative Council Chairman Pierre Rochman suggested that the charter panel was reinventing the wheel.

“I’m surprised at how dramatic their proposals are, and it disturbs me that they’re looking at things that didn’t work before,” he said. “They’re not looking at the past. They’re proposing something that has already been tried and they are trying to do it again. History is supposed to teach you things, and you shouldn‘t be ignoring it. My understanding of the proposed changes is that they basically want to do away with the council by giving it very little to do. If that’s the case then they should just eliminate it because you’re only adding to the bureaucracy.”

The dialogue was heated at times as both sides stood firm. Charter Revision Commission Chairman Bill Sheluck called it a frank exchange of ideas. Other commission members characterized the council’s position as arrogant, since it wasted little time in shooting down the proposals.

“Much of the commentary from the council dealt with the past and we as a commission are trying to deal with the future,” said Mr Sheluck.

When the meeting was over, the only question still left unanswered was whether the Charter Revision Commission would be willing to petition to have the proposed changes put on the ballot next November if the council turns them down.

Resident Mike Snyder, who has attended many of the charter meetings, said he would support any move to petition the proposed changes onto the ballot. Mr Snyder, who chaired the last Charter Revision Commission four years ago, said he supports the proposed changes.

“I feel that the plan is a sensible one,” he said. “To me, it seems like the council fears they might lose their jobs.”

Under the proposed revisions, the job of the council members would change significantly. By creating a board of finance, the council would still have the final say over most budgetary issues. However, the year-round financial planning would fall into the hands of the board of finance. In addition, the commission has proposed making the first selectman stronger by giving the position veto power over the council and by increasing the term of office from two to four years.

Council member Doug Brennan vehemently opposed this plan, likening it to a fascist government, like those of Germany and Austria. Longtime council member Melissa Pilchard agreed, wondering what the council’s role would be under this new scenario. “We are the board of finance in this town. If you take away this responsibility and give the selectman veto power, then what’s the council supposed to do? Even the creation of ordinances, you can’t pass those in splendid isolation. They all have financial impact.”

Some council members fear giving veto power to the first selectman would create solid political alliances, which the town has managed to avoid over the years.

“You can have a brand new person with no experience get elected first selectman and you want to give him all this power and put him in for four years. The State of Connecticut does not allow for a recall,” Mrs Pilchard said.

Mr Sheluck said veto power for the first selectman might help create larger majorities on the council. “One of the comments made is it’s very difficult to get eight people to agree on any vote, and we as a group were kind of surprised by that,” he said. “If that’s the case, then the idea of giving the first selectman veto power would, in our opinion, improve the likelihood that a greater majority might be gained on council votes.”

Mr Sheluck said his board’s proposals are not designed to take away power from the council. Instead, the idea was to enhance the overall decision making process of the town.

“We don’t agree with the council that a separate board of finance takes away from the council’s power. The council will still have the final say on the budget and we’ve also raised the item limit on special appropriations to $500,000 at the discretion of the council,” Mr Sheluck said. “The strongest argument for a separate board of finance is the town’s financial affairs will be dealt with on a continuous basis throughout the year and as a separate entity. The Board of Finance is able to express its views independently of council decisions. As it stands now, the finance subcommittee, which consists of five members, need only add two votes to gain a majority. The finance subcommittee can either hide behind the council decision or influence it to a great degree.”

Mr Sheluck has noted that Finance Director Ben Spragg has advocated the creation of a Board of Finance. However, this week, Mr Spragg said his vision was far different from what the charter panel is proposing.

“What I’ve proposed is not what they’ve called for. I was thinking about a combined first selectman/Legislative Council so that they would run the town together in harmony, and then spin off a board of finance,” Mr Spragg explained. “The Charter Revision Commission is proposing a first selectman with certain executive powers and then the council exists with other responsibilities, and thirdly, a board of finance.”

Mr Spragg said his plan would help clarify the confusion over who makes the important decisions in town and it creates a finance board to assist with the financial decisions.

“But that’s not what’s coming out of the Charter Revision Commission. They are proposing the same government as now without a board of selectmen and adding a finance board,” he said.

Council member Will Rodgers said he was concerned that a separate board of finance might be able to make financial decisions without having to deal with the political ramifications.

“The Board of Finance may end up like the Board of Education,” he said. “I’m not opposed to a separate board as long as they don’t operate in a political vacuum.”

Don Studley is one of the few council members who favor the creation of a board of finance. However, he was unable to attend last week’s meeting.

Sending Mixed Messages

Mr Sheluck said that the charges given to his board by the council last fall were mixed and varied. “The nature of the charges gave us no alternative but to look at the entire structure of town government. When the charge suggests that the Board of Selectmen be eliminated, a board of finance be created, a town meeting be abolished, it’s very difficult to deal with each of these issues separately. The only effective way to deal with them is to look at the entire structure of town government to see if it can support the decision-making process going forward,” he said.

Can we expect a petition drive from the Charter Revision Commission?

“We’re trying hard to reach common ground with the council. If we’re unable to do that, then we may have to discuss what options we have, but we have not discussed that to this point,” Mr Sheluck said. “We can’t lose sight of the fact that this town is growing so rapidly and we think it requires some change in government to support the decision making process.