Charter Revision Could Change Face Of Next Budget Ballot

By John Voket

It is quite possible the next time taxpayers go to the polls in April 2011 to vote on the 2011-12 municipal budget, the ballot will look very different. Depending on the outcome of a charter revision process that will ramp up in the coming weeks, voters may be able to endorse a school budget separately from the town budget, and to answer a question or two to help officials determine the motivation behind those budget votes.

To accomplish getting those considerations properly researched and reviewed is the rub, according to Legislative Council Vice Chair Mary Ann Jacob.

“This will have to be a very strict process that the full council will have to follow closely,” Ms Jacob told The Bee July 29. “The commission, once seated, will have to move quickly and be tightly focused if the next budget referendum will be impacted.”

Council Chairman Jeff Capeci agreed, saying he would like to see a revision commission seated by September 1, and a draft of revisions determined and presented back to the council by the first of the year, and “certainly no later than mid-January.”

While a subcommittee of the council will be examining the charges put to the previous two local charter revision panels to help expedite the new commission’s marching orders, another subcommittee will be reviewing possible candidates for the commission, and developing questions for the interview process, Mr Capeci said Thursday.

The council is scheduled to meet August 4, at which point the two subcommittees are expected to report on their progress.

While Mr Capeci said there are other “inconsistencies” in Newtown’s constitutional document, he hopes the focus will primarily dwell on whether to split the budget vote, providing taxpayers an opportunity to accept or reject the town-side and school district budgets independently; and whether or not advisory questions specific to the budget or other issues could be included on the ballot.

“A lot of our surrounding towns have either budget questions, or a bifurcated budget, so there will be a lot of local resources for the commission to examine,” he said.

These two key issues have been points of controversy through previous budget cycles and were both examined and rejected as possible revisions by previous Newtown commissions.

If the commission was to broaden its scope beyond those two issues, Mr Capeci though the panel might look at the issue of how departing members of boards and commissions are replaced.

“The method we’ve seen in how the selectmen and the Board of Ed replace departing members is very different,” Mr Capeci said. “So the move to unify the process and qualify the role of the town committees should have bi- or tri-partisan support.”

The council chairman believes the political town committee of a departing candidate should play a primary role in the replacement.

“We’ve recently seen two instances where recommended Democratic replacements to the Board of Education [were] passed over for individuals who were not top choices,” he said.

As the charter revision process moves forward with a charge and committee candidates in place, Mr Capeci intends to instruct the volunteers to plan to deliver a draft recommendation for changes by mid-January at the latest, so the full council can endorse the draft or make further changes.

If that occurs, those changes must go back for review by the commission before the full council can vote to put the revisions on a ballot. At that point, any resident can petition against any or all of the proposed changes, which could delay a special referendum.

If no public opposition to the proposed charter changes occurs, a special referendum must be held in time for any voter approved changes to take effect in time for the first 2011 budget vote, which will be on Tuesday, April 26.

Ms Jacob said to accomplish meeting the goal of instituting possible changes by the first 2011 budget vote, the charter panel volunteers will have to decide early on if they will focus narrowly on the top two or three issues, or examine a wider variety of issues and possibly miss affecting the next budget cycle.

“I’d like to see the issues of splitting the vote and considering advisory questions put to rest,” she said. “Then, once the voters rule on the final decision, it has to be accepted and everyone has to move on.”