Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Department Head Terms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Britain committee tables proposal to set four-year terms for department heads
Summary
At a Oct. 1 public hearing, the New Britain City committee heard split testimony on ordinance 36955, which would create a uniform four-year term for department heads; after debate the committee voted 5-3 to table the item for further review.
The Committee on Administration, Finance and Law and Public Services in New Britain City held a public hearing Oct. 1, 2025, on ordinance 36955, a proposal to amend chapter 2 of the city code to establish a uniform term of office for department heads. After public comment and committee discussion the panel voted 5-3 to table the measure.
Donald Malinowski, who spoke first during the public-comment period, read from City charter Section 8-2 and warned that a uniform four-year term could deter qualified candidates and politicize department leadership. "I have to go in front of the council every four years and beg for my job back," he said, noting that city retirement vesting requires five years and that could affect candidates' willingness to relocate.
Michelle Malinowski, introduced by the clerk as Chairwoman of the Historic Preservation Commission, told the committee she shared those concerns, saying continuity and institutional knowledge among department heads are important and calling the proposal "a political overreach of council power." She said a four-year term could create a revolving door that would harm city services.
A caller, Albert Lucas, identified himself as director of legislative services in Houston and argued the opposite. Citing a 1992 charter revision in Houston, Lucas told the committee similar term provisions there "have worked out very well over the years," saying they empowered executives to select department heads and did not hinder recruitment in his experience.
After the public hearing closed, Alderman Santiago moved to accept and refer the ordinance to the common council with a neutral recommendation; Alderman Simpson seconded the motion to refer. During discussion, Alderwoman Scott described the proposal as "simple" and "good government," said she supported moving the matter forward and urged committee members to consider a few amendments.
Alderwoman Balenra moved to table the item; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote, which the chair announced as five to three. The committee left item 36955 tabled for further consideration; no roll-call vote on the tabling was recorded in the transcript.
The committee recorded the time as 6:46 p.m. at the close of the item. The matter will return to future committee or council agendas for further action.
