From its inception last fall, Newtown’s Charter Revision Commission has shown a high degree of independence – particularly from the Legislative Council, which created the panel and gave it its charge. Because of the diffuse and varied nature of that charge, however, the members of the new commission concluded that they had no choice but to re-examine local government from the ground up. The proposals that have come out of their work in the past seven months would significantly change the way Newtown does business.

The Charter Revision Commission has emphasized that its purpose all along has been to make local government more effective, dynamic, and responsive to the public will by bringing the sometimes competing priorities of first selectman and the Legislative Council into better balance. This balancing act has clearly tilted power away from the Legislative Council toward the first selectman, creating at the same time yet another counter balance – a board of finance.

The breadth and depth of the changes proposed by the charter panel seem to have unsettled some town officials who are used to working with the status quo. Last month, the council sharply criticized the panel’s suggestions, as might be expected of a body that was losing clout under the proposed charter revision. But even First Selectman Herb Rosenthal has reservations about some of the new powers the charter panel would confer on him, particularly veto power over council decisions. He believes vetoes would further politicize his relationship with the council.

The charter panel has to understand that while its members have been living and breathing the concepts and ideas behind their bold suggestions for changing local government, most other people – town officials and townspeople alike – don’t really get it yet. Exactly how, for instance, would the work of a board of finance dovetail with that of the selectmen and the council? Why is the town meeting being retained when so many of the big issues in town are now decided by referendum? Why should only 3 of the 12 members of the Legislative Council be elected at-large?

The Charter Revision Commission has a rationale and answer to each of these questions and more, and it plans to conduct a public information campaign in the coming weeks, speaking before clubs, civic groups, and anyone else who is willing to listen to explain its reasoning. Building public support for their proposals prior to a townwide vote on revising the charter will be key to the success of the commission. At this stage in the game, however, it may be even more important for the commission to continue its dialogue with the major players in local government – particularly with the Legislative Council and the first selectman. If the council does not understand or support its recommendations, the charter panel will be faced with the prospect of having to petition the proposed changes on to the ballot in November and having to promote them in the context of a confrontation with the council.  It would be better to spend a little time now engaged in a process of education, negotiation, and consultation with the council and first selectman. Winning their confidence and support ahead of time for a set of charter changes would go a long way toward reassuring the town that a vote by the public for charter revision would be a vote for rational evolution rather than a vote for upheaval.