Charter Panel Urged To Allow Appointment Of Town Clerks

By John Voket

In December of 2006, Democratic Registrar of Voters and Charter Revision Commissioner LeReine Frampton was identified by the Charter review panel’s chairman as being the individual who “championed” the successful move to increase the town clerk’s elected term from two to four years.

But during the first public hearing of Newtown’s current Charter Revision Commission September 14, Ms Frampton lobbied for the commission to consider broadening their scope beyond its charge, to consider making the town clerk’s position appointed instead of elected.

Referring to her tenure on the town’s last charter review panel, Ms Frampton said, “We were told to remember that the people and policies in place now could change at any time, and to make decisions based on issues, not personalities.”

In presenting her case for making the town clerk an appointed salaried post, Ms Frampton said under the current status, that official “only answers to voters.” As a result, the town clerk is neither subject to following any recommendation by the community’s top elected official, nor subject to any type of personnel or disciplinary action by the human resources director.

Ms Frampton said that town clerk offices throughout the state have been switching from elected to appointed leadership, and that perhaps it is time for Newtown to consider it.

Tangentially, Town Clerk Debbie Aurelia — a Republican — is the subject of two complaints filed by Ms Frampton to the State Elections Enforcement Commission (SEEC), involving what the Democratic registrar contends is a litany of concerns she has or has had about the way the Republican town clerk has managed the office. One complaint notes that Ms Frampton’s daughter Sarah ran unsuccessfully to unseat Ms Aurelia in the November 2009 local election.

During the current Charter Revision Commission’s hearing, Police Commissioner and Independent Party of Newtown Chairman Bruce Walczak also appeared asking the panel to consider broadening its scope to deliberate whether the town’s charter should mandate the town clerk to maintain Internet postings of local board and commission meeting minutes, agendas, and related materials.

Mr Walczak referred to a recent change to state Freedom of Information statutes, which initially made the Internet posting of all meeting agendas, minutes, and motions a requirement. That provision was since repealed and will no longer be in effect after October 1, Mr Walczak told the charter commissioners.

“The charter can be changed to require the provision locally,” Mr Walczak said.

Charter Commission Chairman William Lavery responded to the proposal suggesting it might be more effective if Mr Walczak’s proposal is established through a local ordinance, versus a charter revision.

“If the Legislative Council passes the ordinance, and they change the law in Hartford, [the ordinance] will be more easily adaptable to change than the charter,” Judge Lavery said.

When contacted about Mr Walczak’s proposal, Ms Aurelia pointed out that both preceding and during her tenure, Newtown has been extremely proactive when it comes to making documentation about local meetings public via the web. And since the FOI law was initiated, her office has been making continuous progress, further educating and supporting local board and commission chairs about the timely filing of motions and minutes.

After hearing about the charter suggestions posed at the public hearing, First Selectman Pat Llodra said she did some research and discovered that only four Fairfield County communities have appointed town clerks, and that she views an appointed versus elected position as having greater political ramifications.

“An appointment process conducted by a political board, in the case of Newtown with the possibility of the majority being of the same party, may not serve the best interests or desires of the community,” Mrs Llodra, a Republican, said. “The system we have is serving us well, and I feel we need a compelling reason to shift. I don’t see any compelling reason to consider an appointed town clerk versus an elected one.”

In regard to the town’s conformity to FOI statutes on posting meeting motions and minutes, Mrs Llodra said despite the mandate to do so being changed, the current system will remain in effect, and will continue to be improved.

“We have the system and capacity to post this information on the web,” Mrs Llodra said. “But as a result of the change in the law, I’m glad to see if we have some unavoidable personnel or technical issue that temporarily prevents us from posting the information, Newtown will not be in violation of the law.”

The first selectman said the process by which the town clerk and her staff have been conforming to the soon-to-expire FOI statute “has been an open, ongoing, active, and conscious refining process.”

“We often go way above and beyond what the statute requires,” Ms Llodra said of providing public meeting information. “I don’t think we need a charter stipulation or an ordinance to mandate something we already demonstrate as a voluntary commitment.”

In addition to their suggestions beyond the scope of the current charter committee’s charge, Mr Walczak and Ms Frampton also offered some ideas related to that directive.

The current commission’s limited charge involves considering whether Newtown should have a bifurcated budget, and whether advisory questions may be included on the local budget ballot to help better determine the motivation behind taxpayer endorsement or rejection of the annual spending plan.

During his comments, Mr Walczak said he supported splitting the budget to provide an opportunity for taxpayers to vote separately on the annual town and school proposals. He also suggested that if advisory questions are allowed, the commission should determine a way for voters to respond to either why they supported or rejected the measure.

“Give a choice to those who votes Yes, even though they feel [the budget proposal] is too low,” Mr Walczak said.

Ms Frampton said she could not lobby for or against budget questions, but reminded the panel that by state law, any ballot question must begin with the word “shall,” be phrased in the form of a question, and must yield a Yes or No answer.

The current commission was charged as such, to encourage a recommendation that might be put into effect by the time taxpayers are called to the first 2011–2012 budget referendum in April 2011.