The Charter May Upstage The Candidates This Year

By Steve Bigham

The most vigorous campaign being waged in Newtown this year has nothing to do with Owen Carney or Herb Rosenthal, the Legislative Council, or Board of Education. The high profile campaign this year is all about the charter. The former members of the Charter Revision Commission have launched an all-out effort to get their proposed changes to town government approved.

The Charter Revision Commission members recently announced that they expected to spend more money on their effort than both the Democrats and Republicans combined. After 13 months of work, the board is determined to see its work through after hitting roadblocks at almost every turn.

“It seems like at every step of the way somebody has come up with an obstacle in one form or another, but we’ve persevered. It’s coming down to the wire and the voters will decide on Tuesday,” said commission chairman, Bill Sheluck, who has spearheaded the effort. “We will be blanketing the town this weekend with pamphlets describing the five questions and the reasons why `yes’ is the right vote.”

The proposed changes are significant and, according to the Charter Revision Commission, are designed to support long-term planning and vision, encourage better budgeting, make elected officials more accountable, and provide a better balance of power among the various branches of government.

The charter changes are not without opposition, but advocates are working hard to win support for the creation of a Board of Finance, the elimination of the Board of Selectmen, and veto power for the first selectman. Just as important are the smaller changes that create a clearer, more concise description of how the town should operate, according to those supporting the changes.

The Board of Finance proposal has been opposed by some, including longtime Legislative Council member Melissa Pilchard.

“The redundancy between two boards dealing with the town finances gives extraordinary opportunity to pass the buck,” she said. “You need to make it clear who is making the choices you like and the choices you don’t like. The opportunity for chaos is multiplied for the number of people involved. This town has run very well financially. We have a high bond rating, kept the mill rate stable, and done extraordinary capital things. Why in the world would anybody want to change anything that is working so well? It’s not broken.”

The commission argues that an independent Board of Finance can devote all its energies to the financial issues surrounding town government and provide better long-range planning.

Roadblocks at Every Turn

The Charter Revision Commission’s proposed changes almost didn’t make it on to the ballot after the Legislative Council voted to reject most of them back in August. An 11th-hour petition drive by members, however, helped get it on the ballot.

The charter change proposal took a hit this past month when it was discovered that an “effective date” had been left off the document. Under state law, the absence of an effective date assumes any approved changes would go into effect 30 days after the election. The Charter Revision Commission had intended to have the changes go into effect in two years. The omission added to another group of opponents to the plan: those who now fear major changes will be “rushed in.”

“Unfortunately, we are the only ones who are still talking about the issues, trying to educate the voters on the merits of these proposals,” Mr Sheluck said. “Everyone else seems to be hiding behind the fact that they would have to be implemented within 30 days and they’ve elected not to discuss the merits. All we have to do is look at what’s happening in New York City and how much can be accomplished in a short period of time with some leadership.”

Many in town, including First Selectman Herb Rosenthal and first selectman candidate Owen Carney,  have advocated the defeat of the proposed amendments and the immediate recommissioning of the board to return the charter to the voters for a 2002 vote. Mr Sheluck disagrees with that strategy.

“What it does is it contaminates the charter revision process because a charter revision has the freedom and flexibility to look at anything it wants with regard to charter revision. It’s unjust for us to impose conditions on a new charter revision commission. If we had to wait another two years to implement a Board of Finance, much of the decision making with respect to Fairfield Hills will have been completed. I think it’s important that we have a Board of Finance in place as quickly as possible to monitor what happens at Fairfield Hills and pass judgment on the new master plan that will be proposed.”

Last week the Board of Education spoke out against the plan, saying the new budget process being proposed would create problems for school officials.

“It appears they’re saying the budget process starts too soon and ends too late,” Mr Sheluck said this week. “I explained to them that the process is elongated because we have added a role for the Board of Finance and timing for first selectman to veto a budget. In addition, we have created a deliberative budget process that we believe will be needs based as opposed to tax rate based,” he said.

The Charter Revision Commission’s proposed changes have been split up into five questions. Its members are hoping voters will vote “yes” on all five questions.