Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milford proposal to impanel charter revision commission fails to reach two-thirds threshold
Summary
The Board debated opening the city charter for revision; supporters cited 43 years without comprehensive changes while opponents warned of vague scope and partisan aims. The roll-call produced 9 yes, 5 no but the city attorney said two-thirds of the full board (10 yes) is required, so the motion failed.
A resolution to impanel a Charter Revision Commission and begin a charter-review process failed to secure the two-thirds vote required under state law, after a contentious debate over scope and timing.
Supporters, including Mayor Richard M. Smith, said Milford's charter is decades old and out of sync with state law. "It's been 43 years," Mayor Smith said. "Our current charter is inconsistent with state statute and departmental names; the public hearings and referendum built into the process are the best form of democratic engagement." (Mayor Richard M. Smith)
Opponents raised concerns that the resolution's language was vague and could invite partisan changes, including extending the mayor's term to four years. "Revising the charter should not be taken lightly," Alderman Fowler said, arguing the commission's charge should be narrowly defined and transparent.
The Board took a roll-call vote that recorded 9 yes and 5 no. After discussion with legal counsel, members were informed the motion required 10 yes votes (two-thirds of the full board) and therefore did not pass.
Next steps: Because the motion did not meet the two-thirds statutory threshold, the proposal to impanel the commission failed at this meeting. Members discussed that citizens may pursue a petition route under state law if they wish to reopen the charter in the future.
