Simsbury charter review hearing draws public calls for transparency, limited structural change

Simsbury Center — The Charter Revision Commission opened a public hearing Jan. 23 and heard a series of public comments urging stronger transparency, better public notice and caution about restructuring local boards and authority.

Residents who spoke said the commission should protect public access to information, avoid adopting changes simply because other towns have done so, and clarify who directs town staff as the commission begins reviewing items proposed by the Board of Selectmen.

The public comments framed the meeting. Diane Nash told the commission that the principle of “consent of the governed” requires active, informed participation and asked the panel to preserve elected, public-facing committees. "Consent of the governed is a reminder of all of our duty to be informed, engaged participants in this democratic process," Nash said.

Lisa Hevner, identified as chair of the Board of Finance but speaking in a personal capacity, thanked commissioners for their service and urged them to protect checks and balances and access to information. "Does the charter adequately protect those who have access to information? To me that is the most critical thing that I’d ask you to look at," Hevner said. She cautioned the commission to treat national model charters as one resource — "take that in perspective" — and recommended vigilance about the consolidation of power.

Other public commenters pressed for procedural improvements. Susie Messina said recent meeting minutes have been "very skimpy or absent" and urged the commission to ensure fuller minutes going forward. Joan Cove called for clearer delineation of the town manager’s administrative duties and for reassessing which boards should be chartered versus created ad hoc: "The town manager should be this chief administrative officer, assuming the legal responsibilities of the office, including the hiring and firing of employees," she said. Lori Boyko urged strengthened transparency, ethics and accountability and recommended adding a Zoom option for even small subcommittees so more residents can observe. Diana Moody and Ellen Gilbert asked the commission to broaden public notice, including signage around town and other outreach, after some residents said they learned about the hearing late.

Commission discussion focused on the Board of Selectmen’s submitted list of topics to review. A staff presenter identified as Bob explained that under statute the Selectmen may submit topics the commission "shall consider" but are not required to adopt them. He walked commissioners through items the board suggested: reviewing the number and function of town boards and commissions (including whether some are dormant), considering 2- versus 4-year terms and staggered terms, reviewing the current mix between elected and appointed officials, revisiting referendum triggers in the charter, and clarifying the charter language that bars members of the Board of Selectmen from giving orders to staff (charter section 4-12).

Bob told the commission the group should discuss questions and then meet with the Board of Selectmen at an upcoming session; commissioners set that meeting for Feb. 4. He also said the commission can ask staff to assemble comparative data from similar towns — demographic and charter comparisons — and that the consultant/staff team can provide prior-revision documents and the previous commission’s final report for context.

The commission handled several routine motions. The public hearing was closed by voice vote. The commission then approved the minutes of the Jan. 7 meeting, and later voted to table further discussion of chapters 1 and 2 of the charter until after hearings with selected boards. The meeting schedule through May will be posted on the commission’s web page and commissioners said written public comments submitted to the commission’s email address will be part of the public record and included in the final report.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to close the public hearing: approved by voice vote (no roll-call names recorded). - Motion to accept minutes of Jan. 7: moved by Paul; seconded by Jeff; approved by voice vote. - Motion to table discussion of chapters 1 and 2: approved by voice vote; Paul recorded as second. - Motion to adjourn: approved by voice vote.

The commission asked staff to provide commissioners with the previous charter revision final report, comparative town data (including GovHR benchmarking referenced by staff), redlined charter materials, and to post meeting dates and materials online in advance of Feb. 4. Written comments can be submitted via the commission email and will be included in the record and in later drafts of the commission’s final report.

The commission’s next scheduled meeting to receive board presentations is Feb. 4; the commission’s full meeting schedule and materials will be posted on the Town of Simsbury website and the Charter Revision Commission page.