To the Editor:

While I question dragging out the charter revision final approval process for another 15 months until November of 2016, I was pleased to see that First Selectman Llodra and the Republican Chair of the Legislative Council have finally come around to the position of the Democratic and unaffiliated members of the Charter Commission.  Eric Paradis had been stressing the need to limit the majority from one political party on the Board of Education to 4, which was what the voters thought that they were approving at the last charter change. Eric’s position was supported by the other Democrat, Kevin Burns, and by the two unaffiliated members, but was opposed by all 5 Republican members of the commission, which include the chair and vice chair of the Republican Town Committee.

Democrats, including Selectman Jim Gaston, Board of Education member Michelle Ku and several members of the Democratic Town Committee testified before the commission to support the intent of the voters and limit the majority to 4.  Other Democratic Town Committee members, including me, wrote letters to the editor to that point. On the other hand, Republican officials either supported the super majority of 5, or were silent.

I also agree that some things, such as the sale of town property, are better left to the ordinance process, which is easier to modify or eliminate if the change proves to be unworkable or unnecessary.  I believe that generally speaking charters should provide for issues of a fundamental or structural nature rather than codifying all the minutia of governing.  Does any town need a charter that is longer than the US Constitution?

Sincerely,

Herb Rosenthal

70 Main Street, Newtown                    July 18, 2015