Charter commission rejects motion to adopt 15-member council model, tables further minority-party-representation discussion

The Charter Revision Commission on March 4 debated three alternatives to increase minority-party representation in Norwalk city government and voted down a motion to adopt a model that would create a 15-member council with three representatives per district.

Commissioners spent more than an hour discussing whether to keep the current five-district structure with five at-large seats (option 1), move to three representatives per district with a cap on same-party winners per district (option 2), or create 15 single-member “mini” districts (option 3). Commissioner Doug Hempstead moved to adopt option 2, which would keep the five newly redrawn districts but assign three council seats to each, with no more than two winners from the same party per district. The commission voted that motion down; the transcript records the motion failed and the chair declared it did not pass.

Commissioners discussed timing and practical effects if they changed district structure. Staff reminded the panel that the commission must deliver a draft report to the Common Council by May 30, 2025, and that any change that requires citywide redistricting would likely be costly and time-consuming. Several commissioners urged delaying any redistricting-driven changes until the next constitutional reapportionment cycle after the 2030 census so the city would not have to perform an additional reapportionment before 2033. Others said retaining at-large seats is important to citywide representation; some argued the at-large system in its present form disadvantages minority-party candidates.

After the failed motion, a separate motion to table further discussion of minority-party representation advanced and carried. Commissioners agreed that the commission will continue other urgent items — finance provisions and the drafting grid — and invite council leadership and finance staff to the next meeting to discuss the CFO’s budget-process proposals.

The commission did not adopt any change to the charter language on representation at this meeting. Commissioners also noted a transition provision referencing historical district boundaries (section 14-1) needs to be removed regardless of which representation option is eventually chosen.

For now the commission left the question open and directed staff to incorporate the scheduling and redistricting considerations discussed into future drafts.