The Best Way Out Of The Charter Mess

Supporters of the proposed changes to Newtown’s charter were dealt a setback last week when it was discovered that a specified “effective date” for the changes was not included in the charter questions, which will appear on the local ballot November 6. The now-disbanded Charter Revision Commission had intended for its recommended charter changes to take effect following local elections in 2003. Without specifying that intention on the ballot questions, however, state law requires that the proposed changes go into effect 30 days after their approval by voters.

This would not be a big problem if the proposed changes to the charter were not so significant. The public is being asked, however, to eliminate the Board of Selectmen, create a Board of Finance, and give the first selectman veto power, among other things. The fundamental dynamics of local government are facing a major shift, and town officials – even those who favor the changes – had hoped for a two-year period to plan and prepare for the change. So, will 30 days be enough time to effect the change from one modus operandi to another? We are sure that it could be done. In fact, town leaders should prepare themselves for the possibility that it may have to be done. If voters approve the changes on November 6, by December 6 the Board of Selectmen will have to disband, the first selectman will have to appoint a Board of Finance, and everybody will have to get busy boning up on the new choreography for the next budget cycle.

Unfortunately, this glaring oversight by those charged with preparing the charter for a ballot vote next month is likely to divert the debate from the merits of the charter changes to whether or not it is wise or prudent to rush these changes into effect. Wisdom and prudence will probably answer “no,” to this latter question, completely undercutting a rational assessment of the value of the changes themselves.

So much time and effort has been expended in bringing the charter proposals to the public for a decision that it would be a shame to discard them for reasons that have nothing to do with their content or possible benefits for the town. The Charter Revision Commission worked for a year researching local governance and reached a consensus on changes that it believed would help Newtown’s leaders better serve residents. The Legislative Council endured a difficult and divisive debate on charter-related issues, and townspeople themselves petitioned the changes onto the ballot. After all that, are we to dismiss the substance of this most difficult and arduous process because of a clerical mistake?

Common sense tells us that we should not embark on a path that imposes major changes on local government in a 30-day period. We would like to see the issue considered and the changes implemented, if deemed appropriate by the electorate, in a measured and deliberate way. Therefore we would recommend that the charter changes not be approved on November 6, but that a final decision on their merits be held in abeyance until townspeople vote on Election Day in November 2002. This would require a commitment by the Legislative Council to bring the proposed charter revisions back to the voters a year from now. It would still give the town a year to implement the changes at the time when they were originally intended – at the end of 2003. From our perspective, it is the best way out of an unfortunate situation.