CHESTER

On Jan. 31, the Chester Charter Commission held its second public hearing regarding its proposed Town Charter document that, if adopted, would restructure its municipal organization from its current structure operating under state home rule into a charter government.

At Chester Town Hall, the commission presented to the audience of citizens a series of slides outlining the changes that would occur with the adoption of a charter. Commission Chair Richard Strauss told the audience that these changes are meant to assuage difficulties the town is facing, as published in the Governance Study Committee Report. These difficulties were found to be the “increased complexity of the town’s government, continuity of executive authority, diffused executive authority, difficulty recruiting and maintaining professional staff, difficulty in finding volunteers to serve and fill vacancies on boards and commissions, and low town meeting participation.”

One significant provision that the commission is proposing under a charter is the expansion of the Board of Selectmen (BOS) in terms of both its members and responsibilities. Under a charter, the BOS would expand from three seats up for election every two years to five seats all up for election every four years. This would align the charter government with the “the principle of minority political representation on boards of selectmen and certain other municipal bodies,” according to state statute, as well as any signs of voter suppression or disenfranchisement with greater representation of a minority party on the BOS.

“That way, the voters can determine the makeup of the majority and minority section of that board,” said Commissioner Pat Holloway.

The commission had previously considered the notion of the members of an expanded BOS having staggered terms, but Holloway added that “you might only have two seats that are open, and they might be only from one party. So, it would really help to get the kind of overall representation that we might want.”

Another significant change would be the elimination of the Board of Finance (BOF) and the absorption of its powers by the BOS. The commission views this shift as a means of boosting municipal efficiency and aligning “the Town’s fiscal authorities with the authority and responsibility for policies, programs, services, and initiatives—and their funding,” according to one of the slides.

A rechristened BOS assuming all financial responsibilities for the town would also receive assistance and advice from a town administrator, finance director, and a proposed Fiscal Policy Committee made up of high-ranking town officials, including First Selectwoman Cindy Lignar. All major financial decisions proposed by the new BOS would still be ultimately subject to a citizen vote in a town meeting for a final say.

“We felt that having a direct correlation of responsibility between the people who run the town and the purse—the cashbox—was a better way to function,” Commissioner Ian McLachlan explained. “The final decisions all will be made by the Town Meeting.”

In the event the BOS rejects a financial decision, residents living under a charter government have the right to petition for a proposition to be included on a town meeting agenda.

Overall public comment at the hearing commended the commission for its work in assembling the draft charter, but took one more of a critical tone regarding its major provisions.

The charter’s elimination of the BOF and the transfer of its powers and responsibilities to the expanded BOS was a point of criticism for several residents. They saw this change as amounting to an excessive consolidation of power for a single executive body.

“I am very nervous about the notion of not having an independent Board of Finance,” opined resident Michael Cressman. “I think it is a necessary checks-and-balance issue that is not taken care of in the way the charter is currently written. I do not think it is adequate. I think there is too much authority given to the Board of Selectmen.”

Other residents like Virginia Carmany told the commission that she felt a Fiscal Policy Committee would tip budgetary decisions made by the BOS in favor of members with greater interest in the town’s finances.

“I don’t see how you can have an oversight board where the superintendent of schools controls 70 percent of our budget, the board of Planning and Zoning has maybe $4,000 in their budget. They don’t have a fiscal responsibility directive, nor do the other boards,” said Carmany. “I think you’re really losing out by losing a Board of Finance.”

Contradicting the minority-rule principle, some members of the public expressed worries that a charter would actually take voting power out of the hands of residents, given provisions that would make several seats—including the tax collector, town clerk, and members of the Planning and Zoning and Zoning Board of Appeals—appointed positions rather than elected ones.

Despite the criticisms, Selectwoman Pat Bandzes said that she supports the work of the commission and that handing a finalized draft over to the BOS must be the commission’s “endgame.” Bandzes considered the inefficiencies that the town faces under current “disorganized” state statutes outlined in the State Constitution that would be done away with a charter.

“The time has come,” stated Bandzes. “Is there a better way to govern in Chester? Yes. It is broken. We need to fix it.”

Commissioner Jesse Gnazzo doubled down on Bandzes’ statement, saying that a change in government away from home rule “paves the way for positive transformation” for the best municipal structure both now and in the future.

“Clinging to a form of government that was developed at the time of Mayflower Compact is not ideal for what we face in 2024 and beyond,” he said.