The current Legislative Council accepted a sweeping Charter revision during a final meeting November 18, but pushed a decision on the five-year capital spending plan off to a newly elected panel that will be sworn into office December 1.

Although many of the current council representatives will return after being re-elected earlier this month, Chair Mary Ann Jacob said there were still a few questions left to be answered. She said a number of council members shared concerns about proposed future bonding for a community center above and beyond a $15 million General Electric grant already in hand to construct and staff such a facility.

Ms Jacob said she expects the newly seated council to pick up that conversation and act on the proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) likely before year's end.

Ahead of that conversation, the council spent about 40 minutes mulling whether to keep or reject a Charter provision that would permit the local Board of Education minority party representation of up to three members, creating a maximum 3 to 4 split between elected Democrats and Republicans.

Currently, the Charter mirrors state statute limiting the minority party to no less than two members on the seven member school board, regardless of the number of votes candidates may have received during local elections.

Following a motion to accept a comprehensive overhaul and revision to Newtown's constitutional document, Council member Phil Carroll made a motion to strike the provision increasing the minority split from 5-2 to 4-3, contending that a 5-2 party split gives electors more flexibility to elect school board members.

On November 4, the council voted 8-4 requesting charter commissioners fashion a “standalone option” asking voters to weigh in on the minimum minority party makeup of the Board of Education.

By putting that individual question to residents as part of a larger raft of revisions on the November 2016 Presidential ballot, council representatives believe it will not play a role in jeopardizing most or all of the remaining revisions voters will be asked to authorize.

Earlier Discussion

During that earlier discussion, council members promoted an overarching concern about giving voters the strongest voice in determining which candidates would best serve the town’s school system, while administering a budget that typically represents more than two-thirds of annual taxpayer expenditures.

Councilman Ryan Knapp argued against a 4-3 minority representation, saying the change could bring “unforeseen implications,” while the current and previous school boards seldom if ever split their votes along party lines.

Mr Knapp pointed out that political town committees only run as many candidates as they can get seated, so as not to pit those candidates against each other on the ballot. But in a 4-3 scenario, “town committees would put forward [fewer] candidates and voters will have less choice.”

Mr Carroll keyed in on that concern as he motioned to remove the 4-3 element from the proposed revision, but that motion was ultimately defeated 8-3. While he was absent, Democratic Councilman Paul Lundquist submitted a letter to the group supporting the idea of empowering voters to decide on the school board party makeup when the entire charter revision goes before voters on the Presidential ballot next November.

'Veiled Threat'

At the same time, Mr Lundquist acknowledged the possibility that one or more council colleagues might try to strike that suggested revision, stating that he would campaign to defeat the entire revision next fall if that component was removed during final council actions this week.

That sentiment did not sit well with departing Councilman Robert Merola who said he was disappointed at Mr Lundquist's "underlying tone," and "veiled threat."

Council Vice Chair Neil Chaudhary expressed concern that removing the proposed 4-3 split provision would risk more than a year's work and hundreds of hours of effort by the Charter Commission.

"The entire revision could be sunk on this," Mr Chaudhary said, adding that he supports a strong initiative to educate the public about pros and cons of a 4-3 minority split. "I don't support taking away (the choice) from the public."

Ms Jacob said she supported letting voters make an informed choice.

"I don't want to see the significant and important work of the Charter Revision Commission lost," she said. "It would be a huge loss to the community."

While saying voters might be best served by district school board representatives, Councilman Anthony Filiato was adamant that voters make the final choice based on the options proposed.

"I find it offensive that a political party can pick a candidate," he said. "Minority representation limits choice by voters. I wish there was an option where they could vote 7 - 0."

With the Charter revision being accepted as proposed, the work of the commissioners, Chairman Jeff Capeci, Vice Chair Robert Hall, and commissioners Kevin Burns, George Guidera, Tom Long, Eric Paradis, James Ritchie, Dan Wiedemann, and Deborra Zukowski, is complete.

Beginning in December, council representatives will begin formulating a voter education campaign to begin explaining the implications of key revisions including the school board minority makeup element.