CHARTER REVISION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING – 04/22/08
6:30 p.m.
Present: James McKenna, Mary Jane Gryniuk, Rick DallaValle, John Ciesco, Jim Reginatto, Thomas Telman, Gerry Zordan
Absent: Victor Muschell, Michael NeJaime, Marie Soliani, Stephanie Lauer, Ken
Edwards
Others Present: Corporation Counsel Weaver, Members of the Public
Chairman McKenna opened the meeting at 6:35 p.m. It was noted that the previous
meeting of April 8, 2008, did not have a quorum, therefore there was no legal meeting
held.
Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the minutes of the March 25, 2008 meeting were
unanimously approved.
The Chair suggested that we deal with some of the lesser issues this evening and item #4
(Remove Selectmen from the ballot) was brought forward. Since there are absolutely no responsibilities associated with this position, motion was made and seconded to include this issue on the ballot, and this motion passed unanimously.
Item #5 was then brought forward (eliminate constables from the ballot), and Mary Jane
Gryniuk and Gerry Zordan led the discussion that they still felt that this was a good entry
level position for people who wanted to get involved in politics. John Ciesco disagreed
and wondered if anyone who ever won a constable position ever moved up on the ballot.
Both Jim Reginatto and Gerry Zordan noted that they had done just that. John further noted that removing the position would make the ballot simpler and also that those positions could then be appointments. Rick DallaValle agreed. Gerry Zordan then made the observation that if we elected constables they could do such work and we could keep that money in Torrington rather than paying out of town marshals for the same work.
The Chair then asked that the question be moved. A motion to eliminate the election
of Constables was made by Mr. Telman and seconded by Mr. DallaValle. The motion
failed unanimously. Therefore #5 will not longer be considered as a Charter change.
Mr. McKenna then brought up the question as to #7 (Create a process to deal with
Charter violations). He asked the question, if someone violated the Charter, isn’t it up to the City to rectify that? If the issue is violating the Charter, under current Section C21-3, there is a remedy. A number of people felt that if the violation were serious enough, the matter could be taken to Court. The question as to who is the administrative legislative body was asked and the answer was the City Council. The Corporation Counsel noted that any violations fall back on the City Council who would be in charge of imposing a penalty. As an example, if the City Council passes a motion that is in violation of the Charter, the public can bring it to their attention, and then it would have to be dealt with in some form.
Even though this section of the Charter has never been enforced, the fact that it has not been done is not an issue. There is a process to enforce it. At this point a member of the public, Mr. Connole, addressed this question and a discussion followed, which ended with the Chairman noting that the public had every right to bring this to the attention of the City Council and ask that the same be rectified.
There was a Motion made by Mr. DallaValle and seconded by Mr. Telman to put this
question (#7) on the list to appear on the ballot. The motion was defeated by a vote of
five nays to one aye.
There was a discussion as to whether or not the issue of changing the name of the Fire
Department to the Department of Fire Rescue would come under the heading of changes
to Technical Language. Corporation Counsel thought it might as it was only a name
change, but wanted to look into further. Mr. Reginatto then asked if this would not be an expensive change in that all the uniforms, patches, truck identification, etc. would all have to be changed. A short discussion followed on that topic. It was finally decided that the Technical Changes category would be discussed at the next meeting after Corporation Counsel rendered her opinion. The consensus of opinion was that we would also hold off on doing anything with issue #8.
The next discussion concerned issue #3 (changing the limits of extraordinary expenses).
It was noted that ten years ago we could have done ten miles of repaving for under
$100,000.00, but in this day, that amount would only cover about two miles. Again, if something came up, such as the collapse of a road that had not been budgeted for, and the cost to repair was over $100,000.00, we would have to go to the voters all of the time and request money to put the repairs out to referendum.
Upon Motion made by Mary Jane Gryniuk, seconded by Mr. Zordan, it was moved to
change Sections C13-7 and C13-8 from $100,000.00 to $300,000.00. The Motion was
unanimously approved and the item will appear on the ballot.
It was further decided by consensus to hold off on discussion of item #6 (Eliminate the
Board of Public Safety and change to appointed Commissioners)
As to item #2, (Extending the terms of office for various City elected officials, including the Mayor, and changing the term of the Board of Education members), there was a lengthy discussion regarding the Board of Ed portion and how the terms could be staggered, which some members felt was very important. The Statute relating to this was read and discussion followed.
Basically, the consensus of opinion was that most members favored four year terms for elected officials. As to term limits, it was felt that the extra wording regarding appointed commissioners should be deleted as this would be too cumbersome. Mr. Telman felt he would rather sacrifice the term limit question so that the extension of terms for elected officials could be addressed. It was agreed to hold off on making a decision as to term limits.
Again, there was a short discussion as to the pros and cons of the elimination of the Board of Public Safety, which will be addressed at another meeting.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 13th at 6:30 p.m. in the Mayor’s
Office.
Upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously approved, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Jane Gryniuk, Secretary
Approved___________________________
| 
