Minutes of the Charter Revision Commission Meeting held on Tuesday March 13, 2007 in the Old Court Room at Edmond Town Hall, 45 Main Street, Newtown, CT.
~
PRESENT: Al Cramer, Guy Howard, Joan Plouffe, LeReine Frampton, Carolyn Signorelli, Board of Finance member Jim Gaston, one member of the press.
ABSENT: Joe Hemingway
Chairman Al Cramer called the meeting to order at 7:01PM.
~
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: Upon motion of Ms. Plouffe, the minutes of the regular meeting on 2/23/07 were unanimously accepted as presented.
~
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
None
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. Should it be necessary to sell or dispose of public property at public auction if the Selectmen determine that such procedure is untenable or not in the best interest of the Town? Discussion and vote.
· Mr. Cramer feels that the current language in the charter is acceptable. Mr. Howard agreed stating that he would be uncomfortable with a single board having the power to make such a decision
· Ms. Frampton made a motion to leave the current language in the Charter unchanged. Motion unanimously carried.
2. Review all prescribed time periods, particularly those associated with the budget process and referenda, to make certain that the same work efficiently? Should defeated Town Budgets be returned to the Board of Finance for review and then forwarded to the Legislative Council? Discussion and vote.
· The commissioners discussed several possibilities for shortening and improving the budget process including holding a joint public meeting instead of having one with the Board of Finance’s pass at the budget and then again at the Legislative Council, ways to avoid delays due to publication requirements, and whether a defeated budget should come back to the Board of Finance instead of just to the legislative council.
· Board of Finance member Jim Gaston explained that while the public meeting is important, there are a total of 5 meetings prior to the Board of Finance’s recommendations on the budget where public participation is offered. He feels that a defeated budget should go back to the Board of Finance because they have the most detailed knowledge of the entire budget and what impacts cuts from certain areas may have on future years.
· Mr. Cramer asked the commissioners to come up with proposals for the following meeting regarding the matter.
3. Should the town acting through P&Z, be given some discretion to accept encumbered easements, open space and roads? Discussion and vote. Section 2-90 e
· Ms. Plouffe stated that she did not agree with accepting encumbered properties for potential liability reasons. The remaining commissioners agreed. Mr. Cramer made a motion to leave the current language in the Charter on the matter unchanged. Motion unanimously carried.
4. Should language be added specifying that the reason for conflict of interest need not be stated in open session or otherwise? Discussion and vote. Section 1-60
· Mr. Cramer made a motion that a member should not have to state the reason for a conflict of interest. Motion unanimously carried.
5. Should a “Lame Duck” First Selectman be proscribed from making appointments from election day forward until end of term? Consider emergency appointments related to sudden vacancy. Discussion and vote. Section 4-01
· Mr. Howard feels that it would not be necessary for a First Selectman to make appointments in the one-month period before a new Selectman was to come into office. Ms. Signorelli agreed stating that it would be inconsistent with the will of the voters for a “lame duck” First Selectman to fill boards.
· Ms. Signorelli made a motion to adopt a provision prohibiting a “lame duck” First Selectman from making appointments from the date of the defeating election until change of office. Motion unanimously carried.
6. Should fewer or more voters be required to successfully petition for a referendum? How easy or difficult should it be? Should this query apply to all referenda? Discussion and vote. Section 7-100
· The commissioners all felt comfortable with the current 5% requirement for a successful petition.
· Ms. Frampton explained that under the current process, if the Legislative Council does not submit the final budget number that would be petitioned until the end of the day on a Friday, the budget is considered accepted on Friday but since the clerk is closed over the weekend, the public cannot pick up the petitions until Monday. Under such a scenario, the public looses valuable time over the weekend to obtain signatures.
· Mr. Cramer made a motion to maintain the 5% requirement for a successful petition and that when the Legislative Council presents the budget to the Town Clerk, it is to be received no later than 12:00 noon on the day it is presented or it will be considered received the following business day. Motion unanimously carried.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be held on Tuesday March 27, 2007 in the Old Courtroom at Edmond Town Hall.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
None
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business Mr. Cramer adjourned the meeting at 9:03 PM.
| 
