Council Balks At

Naming Charter Panel

By Steve Bigham

Several months worth of discontent among members of the Legislative Council surfaced at Wednesday night’s meeting before a large public audience at the library. The animosity was brought out during a widely debated discussion on the formation of a Charter Revision Commission.

At the meeting, council member Joe Borst presented a list of nine people recommended to serve on the Charter Revision Commission by a subcommittee of the council. He made a motion that the group be approved to begin immediate discussion of any revisions to the town charter. Member Melissa Pilchard challenged the motion, saying she did not have enough information on the nine who were recommended or the 11 who were interviewed but not recommended. She said she opposed the selection of two unnamed persons.

After much discussion, the council voted to table the issue so that all 12 council members can receive more information on the candidates. While some supported tabling the issue, including Chairman Pierre Rochman, others vehemently opposed it. In their opinion, the committee has made a recommendation. The council should accept the committee’s recommendation and vote on it, they said.

But member Ruby Johnson raised questions about the process. Why should such a small group of people be able to pick and choose who gets to deliberate the town charter, she asked.

“The council really doesn’t have a choice,” she said. “Did (the 20 candidates) come with an open-mind or did they already have their minds made up?”

Mrs Johnson, a Democrat, accused the Republicans of coming in with an agenda on the last Charter Revision Commission on which she served four years ago. She said the GOP’s unsuccessfully tried to create a seventh seat on the Board of Education. She opposes the idea of having Democratic or Republican town committee members on the charter revision panel.

The heated discussion drew noticeable objection from the audience, which included all or most of the nine people recommended to serve on the Charter Revision Commission. They attended at the request of Mr Borst, who chaired the council’s charter revision subcommittee. Other subcommittee members were Peggy Baiad, Pierre Rochman and Dan Rosenthal.

Those recommended to serve on the commission were Republicans Owen Carney, Kevin O’Neil, Jane Sharpe and Harry Waterbury; Democrats Michael Floros, Joe Hemingway, Ed Kelleher and Jack Rosenthal. Al Cramer was recommended to serve as an unaffiliated representative.

Early on, Mrs Pilchard scolded Mr Borst for picking the nine people and then calling all 20 candidates to inform them of the vote. “Subcommittees make no binding decisions. The full council must vote first,” she said.

Member Will Rodgers pointed out that the council usually accepts a recommendation from a committee, entrusting that committee to do the homework and to make the prudent choices.

Mrs Pilchard also wondered if the code of ethics had been followed, pointing to a clause that states the officials should “avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest.” She went on to accuse the subcommittee of concealing the names of those who had been selected. In addition, she pointed out that few of the nine people recommended had any experiences serving on  town boards or commissions.

“That’s not a criteria,” noted Mr Borst.

“Well it is if I’m going to vote for them,” Mrs Pilchard responded.

“But you’re only one vote,” Mr Borst said.

Ignoring an unspoken rule of the council not to air its dirty laundry in public, Mrs Pilchard said she was disgusted with the behavior of this current council, accusing members of being “malcontents” and forming “little cliques like 16-year-olds.”

She also expressed her displeasure with the lack of progress being made regarding the possible town purchase of Fairfield Hills from the state. The council has been in disagreement over its role in the handling of the Fairfield Hills issue for some time.

“It’s very troublesome. I haven’t seen the town this angry since the jail,” she said.

The council concluded the discussion by rescinding its initial vote to simply form a Charter Revision Commission. It plans to seek more information on each of the 20 candidates so that its members can make informed decisions about who should (and who shouldn’t) serve on the commission. A vote is expected in late September or early October.

After the meeting, some of those who had been recommended to serve expressed their disillusionment with the process. Mr Hemingway speculated that Mrs Pilchard was opposing the recommendation of himself and Jack Rosenthal.

Town Clerk Cindy Simon was on hand to swear in the nine people who had been recommended to serve. The swearing-in ceremony never happened.