Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charter Commission leans toward longer terms for commissions, to study alternates and staggered transitions
Summary
Commissioners discussed moving many two-year commission terms to three years, debated whether alternates should remain two years or match regular members, and asked groups to map incumbency and staggering before final recommendations.
At its March 3 meeting, the New Canaan Charter Revision Commission discussed standardizing term lengths for boards and commissions and how to handle alternates and transitions.
Commission members reported feedback from public and stakeholder interviews: many commission volunteers said learning governance roles takes time and that two-year appointments can cause administrative churn. Several groups suggested three-year terms would provide continuity and reduce repeated oath-taking and reappointment work.
Members debated whether alternates should remain on two-year cycles (a common current practice) or have the same term length as regular members. Supporters of keeping alternates at two years said shorter terms make it easier for alternates to step away when not regularly seated; others said alternates perform an important function and should have the same appointment length as regular members.
The commission tentatively agreed to ask working groups to study the practical impact of shifting two-year terms to three, produce a staggered-transition plan to avoid mass turnover, and compile incumbency timing so any changes can be phased in without unintentionally vacating multiple seats simultaneously. The commission agreed to exclude decisions about the elective status and term length of selectmen, clerk and treasurer from this immediate change, treating those as separate policy questions.
