Council Chairman Thinks It’s Time To Revise The Charter

By Steve Bigham

Enough is enough, says Legislative Council chairman Pierre Rochman. State law mandates that Connecticut towns update their charters only every five years, and Newtown’s charter was revised just three years ago. But the council chairman is ready to amend the way Newtown is governed right now. By early summer, a new Charter Revision Commission is expected to be in place.

“We know what we want. There’s no reason to wait,” said Mr Rochman, who plans to broach the issue at the council’s April 5 meeting.

Atop his list of needed changes is the elimination of Newtown’s age-old “town meeting” form of government. In recent years, that process has been dominated by a small number of residents who show up with a specific agenda, according to Mr Rochman.

“A very small group of people can spend some very serious dollars. I’m very concerned that this town is being influenced by special interest groups,” said the council chairman, who became disillusioned by this year’s budgetary process, during which two special interest groups coaxed the council into approving a budget with a 2.92 mill increase.

Mr Rochman will also call for a more powerful first selectman position and the elimination of the Board of Selectmen. Currently, he said, there is too much redundancy between the selectmen and the council. In addition, a more powerful first selectman would be able to react to issues and situations faster – like the president of a company, for example. As part of this, Mr Rochman would like to see the Legislative Council strengthened and increased from 12 members back to 18 – where it used to be until a charter revision commission reduced it by six 10 years ago.

Many council members believe some budget dates need to be revised to make for a smoother budget process. For one thing, Mr Rochman said, the town is forced to look at the budget before the state completes its own budget. This forces the council to do a lot of guessing on the revenue side.

Mr Rochman has been disappointed with the lack of change made by recent Charter Revision Commissions, especially the one back in 1996-97, whose biggest revision was to change the charter to read that the town’s finance director can be removed “without cause.” Opponents of that move said it stripped the finance director of his right to due process.

In years past, council members have each submitted individual suggestions for charter changes. This year, Mr Rochman plans to have the council prioritize and vote on the issues so they do not come across as wish lists. In contrast to his suggestion to return the council to 18 members, Mr Rochman will recommend a smaller charter revision commission – one that can easily get to the root of an issue.

“We’ve had difficulty in getting anything done in the past,” he said.

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal says it is imperative that the same number of members from each political party make up the board. Government revision should be as non-partisan as you can get, he said.

By law, there can be anywhere between 5 and 15 members on a charter revision panel. Neither party may have a majority and no more than one third of the commission may hold office as a local official. No Legislative Council members may serve on the commission.

Under the Charter, the Legislative Council is empowered to appoint a Charter Revision Commission to review the charter and any recommendations made by the council.

The charter, which was last revised in 1997, was first adopted in 1961.

 

Other Suggestions

Legislative Council member Will Rodgers said the budget’s public hearing needs to be held at the beginning of the budget process rather than at the end. By the time the hearings take place the budget has already been sent. Granted, he said, it can be re-opened, but it may be too late. Public participation is permitted throughout the budget process. However, those meeting are attended by special interest groups only, he said.

“The public hearings are supposed to be a bit more general and I’d like to see them up front,” Mr Rodgers said.

The council member also suggested the town re-examine having separate votes for the Board of Selectmen and Board of Education budgets.

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal believes the town could use a stronger first selectman, especially as the town continues to grow. He believes Newtown needs a government more like that of Monroe, where there is a first selectman, a council, and a board of finance.

“There would be more accountability for the first selectman. People assume that the first selectman has more authority than he or she really does. The first selectman in Newtown either gets too much credit or too much blame for things,” he said.

Mr Rosenthal said he has other suggestions for revisions, but is reluctant to discuss them at this point because other important issues currently facing the town should take priority.

Council member John Kortze believes there is always room for improvement, but says the town works pretty well as it is right now. Some council members reacted with surprise about talk of revising the charter. They wondered if it was a result of the recent outcome of the council’s budget process.

For council member Peggy Baiad, two things come to mind. “Newtown has outgrown the town meeting. I think things should go directly to referendum. When I think of a town meeting I think of some little town in Vermont or New Hampshire,” Mrs Baiad said.

Also, the council member said she would like to see the selectmen and school board budgets presented separately at the polls.

Finance Director Ben Spragg was out of town this week, but in the past he has urged the Charter Revision Commission to significantly streamline the budget process and vote on all spending, including capital projects, in one referendum. All projects that require bonding should be on the same ballot with the town’s annual municipal/school budgets, he said three years ago.

Town Clerk Cindy Simon said a new Charter Revision Commission should remove the charter clause that states that the finance director can be removed without cause.

“What is the purpose of that,” she wondered.

She disagrees with the idea of going back to 18 council members.

“I thought the council has been working very well together the last couple of years,” she said. “I thought the government had been working pretty well, lately.”

As for the elimination of the town meeting, Mrs Simon has spoken out in favor of that move in the past. However, it never gets eliminated, so why convene a commission just for that, she said.

“They turn it down every time. They don’t want to get rid of it for whatever reason,” she said.