Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Danbury council accepts Charter Revision Commission report and sends it to committee with same‑day public hearing
Summary
The council accepted the Charter Revision Commission’s draft report and referred it to a Committee of the Whole with a public hearing on the same day, following procedural debate about whether those are one or two motions; critics at public comment said the timeline and outreach were insufficient.
The Danbury City Council voted July 7 to accept the Charter Revision Commission’s draft report and to send the report to a Committee of the Whole with a public hearing scheduled on the same day.
The commission’s submission said it met weekly, held public hearings on April 30 and June 25, and prepared text of recommended changes intended to be considered ahead of the 2026 election cycle. Councilman McAllister moved to receive the report and to send it to a Committee of the Whole and a public hearing on the same day; the motion carried after council procedures were debated and corporation counsel advised the motion was properly formed.
Residents who spoke during the meeting urged more time and transparency. Debbie Rizzo said extending mayor and council terms and changing the town clerk from an elected to an appointed office were ‘‘significant changes to how the people of Danbury hold their government accountable’’ and criticized releasing the charter revision report only one day before a council meeting as insufficient time for public review.
Council discussion focused on procedure. Several council members asked whether referring the report and scheduling a public hearing were separate votes; corporation counsel explained the motion was properly phrased as presented and the council voted accordingly. The council also agreed to hold an additional public hearing to ensure opportunity for public comment.
Next steps: the report will be considered by the Committee of the Whole and discussed at a public hearing set for the same day, per the motion the council approved. Any substantive charter amendments would require subsequent council action and, if advanced, placement before voters according to the city’s charter and state election schedule.
