Charter Commission Agrees To Keep First Selectman, Eliminate Board

By John Voket

After six weeks of hearing information on town operations and some finer points of the current charter, members of the newly -seated Charter Revision Commission (CRC) finally had an opportunity to roll up their sleeves and dig in to the document. Taking a top-down approach at this week’s meeting, the six-member panel had formed some consensus on two of the most critical items, while vowing to tackle a few more next session.

Without taking a formal vote to endorse the measures, the CRC unanimously agreed in theory they would not support the idea of changing the town’s leadership to a manager/council form of government — instead endorsing the mayor/council format that is in place now. Commissioners also agreed to try and retain the leadership title of first selectman, although by state definition, the top elected leader would technically be empowered with virtually all the same duties and responsibilities as a mayor.

At the same time, the charter panel agreed on the elimination of the three-member Board of Selectmen, thereby streamlining the government process somewhat by eliminating two selectmen meetings each month in favor of having the first selectman receive public input and report on official business during biweekly Legislative Council meetings.

Suggesting that the combination of a Board of Selectmen/Town Meeting form of government was somewhat archaic for a community the size of Newtown, CRC Chairman Al Cramer quickly polled the remaining commissioners to determine if there was any support for considering a town manager instead.

Commissioner Carolyn Signorelli reinforced the idea that while technically, the form of government would then be mayor/council by definition, she felt strongly about keeping the title of first selectman.

Mr Cramer said he felt it was important for residents to be able to vote for their top town officials, versus a town manager that is hired by and answers only to the elected members of the Legislative Council.

Commissioner Guy Howard said he could foresee issues down the road in a case where there was less cooperation and collaboration between an appointed town manager and the council.

“In the future, if leaders are less agreeable it’s going to be a problem,” Mr Howard said.

Mr Cramer agreed, adding that generally, town managers tend to be vested with too many responsibilities, typically handling financial, human resources and day-to-day administrative duties, as well as attending to other governmental functions and council meetings.

As attention turned to the Board of Selectmen, Commissioner Joseph Hemingway asserted the same idea as he suggested during his previous CRC tenure.

“Present personalities aside, the Board of Selectmen has to go,” Mr Hemingway said. He said that while the current situation has an extremely nonpartisan and interactive membership, future elections might create a situation where a minority party first selectman was constantly pitted against two majority party members.

Ms Signorelli concurred.

“I believe the person who is elected to lead the town should be able to push their agenda without being hampered by party politics,” she said, referring to the legal right the majority of the board has to caucus and formulate votes privately while keeping the minority leader out of the process.

Mr Howard then argued that while he supported a mayor/council form of government, he wanted to revisit whether the top elected official should be designated as a “strong mayor,” or one who unilaterally makes appointments, instead of a “weak mayor,” who must also receive the support of the council for appointments.

At that point, Mr Cramer asked about the charter panel’s support for four-year terms.

Charter commissioners LeReine Frampton and Mr Hemingway both immediately jumped in to support four-year terms for certain offices including the first selectman, Legislative Council, the Board of Finance and the town clerk.

Ms Frampton further suggested a four-year term for the top elected officials should be accompanied by a very specific recall provision. Commissioner Joan Plouffe said there would have to be an extraordinary situation to initiate recall action.

“To really have impact, the recall should come from the voters,” Mr Cramer said. “If it was a serious enough issue, it would be easy to get a large number of signatures on a petition for recall.”

Mr Cramer added that a revision expanding certain offices to four-year terms would require language accounting for a situation where the top elected official dies in office.

Ms Signorelli said that with the multitude of checks and balances already in place in the charter, she had no aversion to four-year terms.

“It might help us attract a better caliber of candidate,” she said. Mr Hemingway agreed, saying most working individuals with the qualities and qualifications for the top elected seat might find it extremely difficult to drop out of their existing job for just a two-year term.

He and Ms Frampton also suggested the learning curve for any top elected official might carry through to the next campaign if the terms remain just two-years.

While no other firm decisions were made this week, the commissioners were sent home with the expectation they would discuss and possibly act on the term limits, the period of time between Election Day and when new elected officials would take over the office, and the possibility of endorsing an at-large council instead of voting in members by district.