Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Commission topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Canaan charter reviewers press to clarify parking commission role, reporting and appeals
Summary
At a Feb. 11 Charter Review Commission Group 1 meeting, members heard from parking-commission representatives and agreed to draft clearer charter language to reflect how the town handles parking operations, appeals and fee recommendations, while checking for any required ordinance or statutory authorizations.
The Charter Review Commission (Group 1) spent much of its Feb. 11 meeting reviewing how New Canaan's parking commission is described in the town charter and whether the charter should be revised to reflect current practice.
Commission members raised three linked questions: whether the charter should adopt the term "parking department" rather than "parking bureau," whether the parking manager's day-to-day reporting line (currently handled through the office of the first selectman, commissioners said) should be named in the charter, and whether the commission's long-standing role in adjudicating parking-ticket appeals is authorized by ordinance as the charter's subsection currently requires.
Members said the town website had been updated the same day to show "parking department," and commissioners discussed whether to mirror that label in charter language or leave the charter silent to preserve flexibility. Several members cautioned against locking a specific reporting structure into the charter, noting the town's administrative arrangements have shifted over the years.
Commissioners identified a practical gap: the parking commission appears to function as the appeals body in practice, but participants were unable to locate an ordinance explicitly authorizing appeals as the charter's subsection prescribes. One member noted: the commission has operated as an appeals body for roughly a decade with public acceptance, but the lack of an authorizing ordinance means the Commission should either ask the town to adopt an ordinance or recommend a charter edit to remove the conditional phrase "if authorized by ordinance" and briefly describe the appeals procedure.
Members also discussed day-to-day operations: the parking manager prepares fee memos and operational recommendations, the commission reviews and recommends whether to keep or change fees, and the manager forwards final proposals for implementation through the first-selectman's office or the budget process. Participants described administrative fixes already used, including a modest $10 waiting-list fee intended to discourage speculative sign-ups.
The commission agreed on next steps: reconcile charter draft language with existing ordinances and internal practice, ask the town to locate any ordinance that authorizes appeals, and delegate a small working group (and counsel review) to draft streamlined charter language that preserves needed flexibility while clarifying the appeals process. The CRC did not adopt final charter language at the meeting; members instructed staff and volunteers to prepare draft text and consult with the parking manager and legal counsel before returning recommendations to the full CRC.
The commission set a follow-up timeline and asked staff to circulate draft language and any supporting ordinance citations before the next meeting.
