Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Article 3 Selectmen topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter review group debates 'first selectman' wording, board size and whether charter allows a town administrator
Summary
At a New Canaan Charter Review Commission (Group 3) meeting, commissioners discussed changing gendered references to 'first selectman,' whether to expand the Board of Selectmen from three to five members, and whether current charter language would permit creating a town administrator role without additional edits.
Members of the Charter Review Commission (Group 3) spent significant time reviewing Article 3, which covers the first selectman and the board of selectmen, debating both language and structural changes.
The commission opened discussion on a worksheet that organized articles, stakeholders and open items, and agreed to start with Article 3. A central debate focused on replacing the traditionally gendered term 'first selectman' with either a gendered pair ("first selectman/first selectwoman") or a gender-neutral alternative. One commissioner said changing the wording "makes sense to everybody," while others urged legal review, noting that the town attorney and lawyers should weigh in on the exact phrasing.
Beyond language, the commission examined whether to expand the Board of Selectmen from three to five members. Proponents argued a larger body would bring broader community input; opponents said expanding could still produce lopsided 4–1 votes and would not solve minority-representation concerns without accompanying rules (for example, requiring certain votes to go to the full council). One member recommended keeping the board at three unless a persuasive rationale for change emerges.
Commissioners also considered whether existing charter language — the duty-to-carry-out provisions — would allow an administration to implement a town administrator role without rewriting the charter. Members cited other towns (Darien, Wilton) as examples of different structures, and questioned practical access issues if an administrator is positioned above the first selectman. Several commissioners concluded the subject would require a "huge separate discussion" and counsel input before any change.
The group agreed to flag legal review items and to circulate recommended wording and possible structural options to attorneys for follow-up. The commission plans to present a formatted draft of the edits to the full commission in a subsequent meeting.
The commission approved minutes earlier in the session and scheduled follow-up work; no charter language changes were adopted at this meeting.
