NORWALK, Conn. – One of the biggest disappointments for Mayor Harry Rilling in his first year in office is the difficulty in getting charter revision off the ground, he said.
“Good Lord,” Rilling said, when reminded last month that it was about time to begin running for re-election. “Ergo the need for a 4-year mayor.”
Rilling has the support of the Greater Norwalk Chamber of Commerce, which is pushing to get something on the ballot for the next municipal election. But while Norwalk Republicans acknowledge that they are aware of the issue they say they’re not sure where they stand on the risky business of opening up the charter.
The Chamber’s Board of Directors voted at its mid-November meeting to vigorously support the creation of a Charter Revision Commission, President Ed Musante said in an email.
“Mike Devine, the Chamber’s Vice President of Government Affairs, and I attended meetings of both the DTC and the Executive Committee of the RTC to discuss a very limited version of Charter Revision,” he wrote, listing these goals:
- Change the term of office for Mayor from two years to four years
- Increase the pay for Common Council members from $50 per month to $500 per month
- Look at the feasibility of changing the term of office of Common Council members from two to four years
“It is the Chamber’s hope that a Charter Revision Commission will be appointed early in 2015 so that these items may be on the ballot for November 2015 to become effective with elections in November 2017,” Musante wrote.
Rilling said it’s in the hands of the Common Council. “The mayor can make the request. We mentioned it, we discussed it,” Rilling said. “I brought it up during the campaign as did Mayor Moccia; both of us felt as if it was something necessary and we’re trying to move that forward. In fact, I mentioned it with new leadership of the Council and with the old leadership, on both sides, and told them about my desire to begin those discussions again.”
The creation of a charter revision commission would take a two-thirds majority of the Council, putting it in the Republicans’ hands, Rilling said.
Asked for an opinion, Republican Town Committee Chairman Pete Torrano took issue with Rilling’s “disappointment.”
“I’ve heard nothing from the mayor, I checked with Councilmen and they heard nothing about it,” Torrano said. While Rilling had talked to then-Council President Doug Hempstead (R-At Large) and then-Majority Leader Jerry Petrini (R-District D) on the phone, “it wasn’t anything that was brought up officially anywhere or discussed in a meaningful way,” Torrano said.
Rilling said he had made numerous phone calls to the Republican Council leadership, and left numerous messages.
“Peter Torrano can try to deflect over to me the responsibility for that but it’s the Common Council,” Rilling said. “… Peter Torrano can throw potshots all he wants, which is normal for him. Instead of taking a high road and a positive road like the Democratic Town Committee chairman, he always tries to throw potshots whenever he feels it’s an opportunity to make a political statement.”
Petrini’s story jibed with Rilling’s. “We’ve talked about it quite a bit and I know he’s a proponent of it, he would love to see it,” Petrini said. “We’ve got some pros and cons, but there’s some difficulties, I would guess, that we’re still trying to iron out.”
Hempstead did not return a request for comment.
Musante and Devine talked to the RTC about two months ago, Torrano said. Rilling said the Chamber met with the Democrats two weeks ago. “It appeared to us that both groups received the request well,” Musante said.
Torrano said the RTC was waiting to hear back from the Democrats. “I can’t tell you because we have to discuss it with the Democrats and there would have to be some understanding of what we would do if we open up the charter,” Torrano said.
“We are aware of it and we are still kind of discussing it. I don’t have an answer one way or another which way we are leaning, but I am still keeping an open mind,” Petrini said.
Democratic Town Committee Chairman Ed Camacho said on Sunday that he had recently discussed the matter with Torrano.
“We’ve agreed to meet very soon to discuss the parameters of any proposed charter revision,” Camacho said. “As yet, the DTC, like the RTC, has taken no official position regarding it, although my sense is that both parties ultimately support the limited charter revision supported by the Chamber, including revising the term of Mayor from two to four years.”
Musante said the Chamber supports the four-year term for Mayor for a variety of reasons including:
- “It takes a new mayor the better part of a year to understand the details of the position and to become most effective and just as he/she does that it is time to run for re-election.
- “It provides longer-term stability in policy and makes it easier to attract investment.
- “It provides a sitting mayor the ability to make decisions that would be good for the longer term than just what might be politically beneficial for an upcoming election (at least for the better part of the four year term).
- “It should serve to help attract larger fields of qualified candidates willing to leave other employment to serve their city.”
Rilling said that people who come to talk to the mayor with ambitions plans “want to know that that discussion, those agreements, are not going to dissolve if the mayor was no longer elected to the next term. So there is a degree of stability that they feel is necessary in order to make a commitment to the community.”
The 4-year terms for Council members would be staggered like the Board of Education members, he said. One benefit would be less money spent on elections, not only for the city but for those who donate to campaigns.
Rilling said politicians hate to go around asking for money.
“That’s a fact of life in Norwalk, in the state of Connecticut, in the United States in general. But it’s not something that’s very pleasant, it’s not something you like to do. So if you only had to do that every four years it would be more palatable than having to do it every two years,” Rilling said.
In addition, people who are appointed to boards and commissions have terms that are much longer than two years. “The problem is that a mayor comes into the office with his or her vision in mind and unless you get two terms you are not going to be able to get (the commissions to) support you with that vision that you have,” Rilling said, referring specifically to the Zoning Commission, the Planning Commission and the Redevelopment Agency. “Some of the people who are appointed to these boards and commissions could last a lot longer than that mayor. So while there are some checks and balances in that system, and that’s good … It’s very difficult to get those people in place and start moving forward in that direction.”
Council members spend a lot of time in researching and reading materials, Rilling said, explaining, “It takes a tremendous amount of time and energy to be a Council member.”
The $50 a month stipend for Council members dates back to 1935, Rilling said. To bump it up would take charter revision, he said. This might be phased in, going to $250 a month and then up to $500 a month in three or four years, Rilling said.
“Back in 1935, $50 meant something. Right now $50 is really nothing. Once you take taxes out I think it’s somewhere around $46,” Rilling said. “So I think in order to encourage good candidates – I know the people who are serving are good candidates but they are doing so regardless of the stipend – but it would be nice if we would be able to pay them like some of other communities around the state of Connecticut do.”
Leave a Reply
You must Register or Login to post a comment.