Minutes of the Charter Revision Commission Meeting held on Tuesday January 23, 2007 in the Old Court Room at Edmond Town Hall, 45 Main Street, Newtown, CT.
~
PRESENT: Al Cramer, Guy Howard, Joan Plouffe, LeReine Frampton, Joseph Hemingway, Carolyn Signorelli, Board of Education Members: Lisa Schwartz and Elaine McClure, Superintendent of Schools-Evan Pitkoff, one member of the press, one member of the public.
Chairman Al Cramer called the meeting to order at 7:00PM.
~
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: 2 Corrections to the minutes were noted. 1. The minutes should have stated that 2 members of the public were present. 2. Item #4 under action taken should state that 4 members voted in favor and 2 opposed (Hemingway and Cramer). Upon motion of Mr. Hemingway, the minutes of the regular meeting on 1/9/07 were unanimously accepted as amended.
~
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
1. Superindendent of Schools Evan Pitkoff indicated that he cannot find any current research to support the Commissions previous recommended changes for the Board of Education. He feels that having continuity on the Board of Education is extremely important. Research indicates that one of the largest problems facing Boards is attracting and retaining members. Most members only serve one term and having shorter terms of office would lead to higher turnover on Newtown’s Board of Education.
2. Board of Education member Lisa Schwartz read a statement of her opinions on the Charter and Board of Education (Attachment A).
3. Board of Education Chairman Elaine McClure feels that the Board of Education should be elected at large rather than by district. Ms. McClure supports leaving the number of Board members at 6 and reminded the Charter Revision Commission that when they were appointed, 6 were chosen because the decisions they would be making were so important that they wouldn’t want something defeated by just one vote. She feels that the Board of Education operates in a similar manner and that having 6 members leads to further discussion and consensus building.
~
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. In accordance with motion on January 9th, 2007 the following reconsidered question is removed from the table for discussion and vote: Should the Board of Education be increased to nine members each having two year terms; and the three current Legislative Council districts used to elect three Board members in each of the districts; and the number of members elected of any one political party in each district shall not exceed two? .
· Mr. Cramer distributed a statement with his opinion on the matter and a possible solution utilizing CGS 9-167a (Attachment B). Mr. Cramer also distributed a copy of the statute (Attachment C).
· Ms. Frampton shared feedback she had received from residents regarding the Board of Education and the Commissions proposal. She indicated that residents seem to feel that the Board needs more accountability, that they are too involved in everyday procedures, and that the Commission needs to take caution not to politicize the Board. She feels that utilizing 9-167a may politicize the Board.
· Mr. Howard does not see in statutes or the Charter where it dictates that the BOE must have 3 republicans and 3 democrats. The language reads that they cannot have more than 3 of one party. In the case of an independent or unaffiliated candidate, there would be numerous possibilities for Board composition. Ms. Plouffe agreed with Mr. Howard and questioned how the ballot would read in such a case. Ms. Frampton indicated that an unaffiliated candidate would be included on the ballot as a nominating petition.
· Mr. Cramer made a motion to reconsider the previous motion by Mr. Hemingway regarding Board of Education number of members, length of term, and election by district. Motion to reconsider unanimously carried.
· Mr. Cramer made a motion to vote on the original motion. Original motion unanimously denied.
2. In accordance with motion on January 9th, 2007 the following reconsidered question is removed from the table for discussion and vote. Should the procedure of electing Legislative Council members by district be maintained in which four members are elected in each of three districts, and no more than three from the same political party may be elected from each of the three districts.
· Ms. Signorelli questioned why the council has 12 members. Ms. Plouffe indicated that the Council is larger because they have mandatory subcommittees. Mr. Hemingway feels that the current 12 member Council works well.
· Mr. Howard thinks that a structure with 4 year terms and having the Council elected at large may work. If half of the Council were elected every two-years, the possibility of the entire council turning over at an election would be eliminated and it may be easier to attract candidates using an at large system. Ms. Frampton feels that residents like having district representation and that a 2 district system would work well. Ms. Plouffe disagreed indicating that all the feedback she has heard is that people want to be able to vote for the best candidates in Town regardless of which district they may be in.
· Mr. Cramer made a motion to accept the original motion as presented. Mr. Cramer and Mr. Hemingway voted in favor of the proposal, with the remaining Commissioners voting against. Motion denied.
· Mr. Cramer asked the Commissioners to consider possible structures for consideration for the next meeting.
3. Should the Town be permitted to manage end of year budget surpluses?
· Mr. Howard does not feel that a Moody’s upgrade is contingent on the single item of managing the budget surplus. He feels that any creditor will favor having less restrictions on how funds can be utilized and that any discretion the Charter may allow will be an improvement on the current situation.
· Ms. Frampton pointed out that any funds that would be expended from such a surplus would have to go through the normal approval process of any other money that is spent.
· Mr. Hemingway made a motion to vote on the matter. 5 Commissioners in favor of voting. Mr. Howard voted against. Motion to vote carried.
· Mr. Hemingway made a motion to allow the Town to manage end of year budget surplus’. 5 Commissioners in favor. Mr. Howard voted against. Motion carried.
4. Should a five-year Capital Improvement Plan be updated each year?
· Mr. Cramer explained that by updating the CIP each year, new projects can be added and prioritized each year as opposed to having to wait a year for what may be a substantial project. Mr. Howard does not feel comfortable making decisions regarding items that may be impacted by a possible Town Planner before a decision on such a role in the Charter has been made.
· Mr. Howard made a motion to table agenda item #’s 7&8. Motion unanimously carried.
ACTION TAKEN
1. Mr. Hemingway made a motion to reconsider the previously approved motion for 2-year terms for Legislative Council. 5 Commissioners in favor. Mr. Cramer voted against the motion. Motion carried.
2. Mr. Hemingway made a motion to reconsider the previously approved motion for 2-year terms for Board of Finance. 4 Commissioners in favor. Mr. Cramer and Ms. Plouffe voted against the motion. Motion carried.
3. Mr. Hemingway made a motion to reconsider the previously approved motion for 2-year terms for Board of Selectmen. 4 Commissioners in favor. Mr. Cramer and Ms. Plouffe voted against the motion. Motion carried.
4. ~Mr. Hemingway made a motion to reconsider the previously approved motion for 4-year terms for the Town Clerk. 3 Commissioners in favor. 3 Commissioners opposed. Motion denied.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be held on Tuesday February 13, 2007 in the Old Courtroom at Edmond Town Hall.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None
~
ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Cramer moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded and unanimously carried. Having no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:57 PM.
~
~
~
~
~
~
Patrick M. Kelley, Clerk
| 
