Town Government Needs A Tune-Up,

Not An Overhaul

Only about 20 people showed up for the first public hearing sponsored by the Charter Revision Commission on the future shape of government in Newtown. Those who did attend the November 30 session, however, were not shy about expressing their opinions on the topic of local government. Some characterized it as inefficient and ineffective and called for radical changes in the way things are done. As one resident put it, the Charter Revision Commission should start from “square zero” and build a brand new government.

It is hard to determine exactly what motivated these comments. Was it frustration over the pace of negotiations with the state for the purchase of Fairfield Hills? Was it disappointment over a decision by the Planning and Zoning Commission, or was it the growing tax rate that made these residents yearn for big changes?  No doubt, most of the residents present were unhappy to varying degrees with the way their local government was performing.

Should local officials be alarmed?

Look at it this way. The Charter Revision Commission issued a call to Newtown’s 25,000 people to come forward with suggestions on how local government could be made better. Twenty people showed up. Evidently, the status quo isn’t all that intolerable to most Newtowners.

In our experience, we have seen that when there are fundamental problems in Newtown – with budgeting, with schooling, with any issue of import – people mobilize. Looking at the small gathering at the charter hearing in the middle school auditorium last Thursday night, one of Yogi Berra’s great insights came to mind: If people don’t want to come out to the ball park, nobody’s gonna stop ‘em.

Unless a significant groundswell of public opinion arises at future hearings calling for the wholesale reconstruction of Newtown’s government, we don’t think the charter panel should radically alter our system of governance. That is not to say that there isn’t significant work to be done. There are aspects of the system that aren’t performing as they should, and they should be addressed. Two come immediately to mind, and both have to do with the expression of the public’s preferences.

The town meeting, for example, was a once-useful tool for the expression of the public will in Newtown. It has long since rusted over. Since so few people attend town meetings, they are no longer representative of the town, and they have become vulnerable to packing and mischief by special interest groups. The referendum, on the other hand, is a binary yes/no automaton that may decide questions, but without the richness of debate that used to be a hallmark of town meetings. This is an important area that cries out for improvement and innovation.

The Charter Revision Commission must also address the declining number of choices to be found on our local election ballots. The first priority should be to bust up the cozy codified arrangement that allows the Democrat and Republican parties to hand-pick the Board of Education, giving each an equal number of members on the school board. The parties had adopted the practice of only nominating candidates for assured seats on the board, effectively making the board that oversees the largest portion of public spending an appointive board. Never mind that the largest segment of registered voters in town is neither Democrat nor Republican, but unaffiliated.

For the most part, however, Newtown’s government runs well and is well configured. It may need a tune-up, but a major overhaul is unwarranted.