OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Danbury City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Charter Revision – March 24, 2026

Meeting PortalTuesday, March 24, 2026
BodyDanbury, Connecticut
SessionMeeting Portal
DateTuesday, March 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:26:25

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Alright, everybody, I'm gonna call the meeting to order.

0:03

My I got for myself.

0:05

It is 601 p.m.

0:08

sitting next to me, not the I make it.

0:10

Cool.

0:12

Can I begin?

0:13

Okay.

0:16

Uh it is 601 p.m.

0:17

I am Joe Britton.

0:18

I am the chairman of this ad hoc committee of the city council.

0:22

Um the subject of this committee is the charter revision commission establishment.

0:29

Um committee members are present, councilwoman, province and councilman Henry, members, ex officio that are present are councilman Dwayne Perkins.

0:41

I've got councilwoman Faye, Councilman Laughinghouse, Council President Busade, Councilman Flanagan, members of the public, as well as our honorable mayor, uh councilman Jordano, and uh that's member from the mayor's office as well for our Santos.

0:57

I think that's all the officials and the remaining constables frantic as well.

1:00

It's an elected.

1:02

Uh okay.

1:03

Uh we're gonna get going here.

1:05

So uh ground rules kind of the roadmap for the committee tonight.

1:08

Uh, what we're gonna do, we are going to go through the ad hoc request letter that came in from the mayor.

1:14

Um, and it's two parts.

1:15

We're gonna talk about whether we open charter revision, yes or no.

1:20

And the second part is the slate of recommended candidates for the commission, yes or no.

1:25

So it's two very pointed pieces that we're gonna go over tonight.

1:29

We have one resolution, um, that's go through each part, uh, keep everything pointed, questions very targeted at those two things, so we don't go outside the scope of the committee, but that's the roadmap.

1:43

We'll hear from exficio members, but um, if I start to see that you're venturing outside the scope of the ad hoc, I will rein you in.

1:50

So that's the idea.

1:52

Any questions or comments from the committee members on the roadmap for this evening?

1:58

Good to go.

2:00

Okay.

2:02

And for the record, councilman Rotello just arrived.

2:05

And councilman Le Pine.

2:07

So, okay.

2:09

So again, like I said, the purpose tonight, we're gonna go through the draft resolution.

2:12

So committee members should have the resolution in front of you.

2:14

This started um as a letter from the mayor asking for an ad hoc to initiate charter revision.

2:20

So we're gonna start off with that first question.

2:23

Um charter revision.

2:25

Obviously, I I will um I guess I will start uh the conversation on that.

2:30

Um, it's been over a decade, uh north of I think 15 years since uh we've had charter revision.

2:36

The city has changed, and I think it even could have possibly been decades before the revision before 2009 took place.

2:42

So I think um, notwithstanding any changes, at least looking at the document is long overdue as it was two years ago when it was proposed initially.

2:53

Um so I'm for it.

2:56

I think the document is a living and breathing document, and the reason why we have language in the charter saying that every 10 years we take a look.

3:03

I think that's there for a reason.

3:04

So I think the the question yes or no, should we initiate it?

3:07

Is a yes for me.

3:09

So open it up to the committee members on that part of the ad hoc.

3:14

Whoever wants to go first.

3:16

I just have a question because it does the last version of the charter, which was 09.

3:21

Is that correct?

3:22

Um specifically said that there would be a revisit on or before July 15, 2019.

3:31

Did that not happen at all?

3:33

So I yeah, so I would say the language, and maybe this is something the Charter Commission should look at, but I I think the language says the city council shall consider an act upon a resolution.

3:45

So I think it's vague enough where as long as they do act on a resolution, whether it is voted up or down, it satisfies that requirement.

3:52

But the council did take.

3:58

The council did vote on it, voted it down, but they did act on it.

4:02

But it was obviously not honored before 2019.

4:08

I mean, I I don't have as far as if it should be revisited.

4:12

I don't think that um I don't really have much to say about why it shouldn't.

4:16

I think that 17 years is a considerable amount of time to have a set of bylaws not be looked at in any for any sound governance in an organization.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Charter Revision█████████████████████████████████████████████87%
Procedural██████12%
Ethics1%
Summary of Proceedings

Danbury City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Charter Revision – March 24, 2026

The Ad Hoc Committee of the Danbury City Council met on March 24, 2026, at 6:01 PM to consider Mayor's request to initiate charter revision and appoint a nine‑member Charter Revision Commission. After extensive debate on process, transparency, and the proposed slate, the Committee voted to recommend a single resolution covering both initiation and appointments to the full City Council.

Discussion Items

  • Opening Charter Revision: Chairman Joe Britton (also a nominee) supported initiation, noting it had been over 15 years since the last revision and that the charter is a living document. Several council members (Henry, Rotello, Fay, Schnees, Perkins, McQuella) argued the resolution should be split into two steps: first initiate revision, then later appoint the commission, citing state statute and past practice. Corporation Counsel opined that the law does not preclude doing both in one resolution, and that the full council could still amend the slate. Mayor Cavo defended the single‑resolution approach, stating it is efficient and allowed by statute.
  • Proposed Commission Slate: The nine nominees were listed: Isabel Almeida, Glenda Armstrong, Joe Britton, Wilson Hernandez, Dan Jowdied, Deborah McCarry, Joe Putnam, Mary Jean Ribero, and Michael Sefranic. Council members expressed concerns about insufficient time to vet the names, lack of bios and party affiliations (later provided: five Democrats included), and that several nominees were not present at the meeting. Mayor Cavo stated his office vetted the individuals for commitment and representation of the city, and offered to provide additional information.
  • Conflict of Interest: Councilman Rotello questioned the appropriateness of Chairman Britton voting on a resolution that includes himself as a commission member. Corporation Counsel stated no conflict exists because the position is unpaid and there is no personal financial interest.
  • Size of Commission: Some members (e.g., Councilwoman Faye) suggested the commission should be expanded to the maximum of 15 to ensure broader representation. The chair noted the council could amend the number when the resolution comes to the floor.

Key Outcomes

  • Motion Carried: Councilwoman Councilman (unidentified) moved to recommend the resolution as presented (initiation, appointment of the nine members, and a 16‑month deadline for the commission to report). Councilman Henry seconded. The motion passed with a voice vote (ayes and nays heard, no abstentions).
  • Next Steps: The recommendation will go to the full City Council for a vote in April 2026. The council may amend the slate or split the question. If approved by a two‑thirds majority, charter revision will be initiated and the commission will have 16 months to submit a draft.
  • Public Comment: No public comment occurred during the meeting.

Notes

  • The meeting was called to order at 6:01 PM and adjourned after the vote.
  • The transcript shows some inconsistency in a nominee's name (David vs. Deborah McCarry); the mayor clarified the Democratic slate includes Deborah McCarry.

Meeting Transcript

Alright, everybody, I'm gonna call the meeting to order. My I got for myself. It is 601 p.m. sitting next to me, not the I make it. Cool. Can I begin? Okay. Uh it is 601 p.m. I am Joe Britton. I am the chairman of this ad hoc committee of the city council. Um the subject of this committee is the charter revision commission establishment. Um committee members are present, councilwoman, province and councilman Henry, members, ex officio that are present are councilman Dwayne Perkins. I've got councilwoman Faye, Councilman Laughinghouse, Council President Busade, Councilman Flanagan, members of the public, as well as our honorable mayor, uh councilman Jordano, and uh that's member from the mayor's office as well for our Santos. I think that's all the officials and the remaining constables frantic as well. It's an elected. Uh okay. Uh we're gonna get going here. So uh ground rules kind of the roadmap for the committee tonight. Uh, what we're gonna do, we are going to go through the ad hoc request letter that came in from the mayor. Um, and it's two parts. We're gonna talk about whether we open charter revision, yes or no. And the second part is the slate of recommended candidates for the commission, yes or no. So it's two very pointed pieces that we're gonna go over tonight. We have one resolution, um, that's go through each part, uh, keep everything pointed, questions very targeted at those two things, so we don't go outside the scope of the committee, but that's the roadmap. We'll hear from exficio members, but um, if I start to see that you're venturing outside the scope of the ad hoc, I will rein you in. So that's the idea. Any questions or comments from the committee members on the roadmap for this evening? Good to go. Okay. And for the record, councilman Rotello just arrived. And councilman Le Pine. So, okay. So again, like I said, the purpose tonight, we're gonna go through the draft resolution. So committee members should have the resolution in front of you. This started um as a letter from the mayor asking for an ad hoc to initiate charter revision. So we're gonna start off with that first question. Um charter revision. Obviously, I I will um I guess I will start uh the conversation on that. Um, it's been over a decade, uh north of I think 15 years since uh we've had charter revision. The city has changed, and I think it even could have possibly been decades before the revision before 2009 took place. So I think um, notwithstanding any changes, at least looking at the document is long overdue as it was two years ago when it was proposed initially. Um so I'm for it. I think the document is a living and breathing document, and the reason why we have language in the charter saying that every 10 years we take a look. I think that's there for a reason. So I think the the question yes or no, should we initiate it? Is a yes for me. So open it up to the committee members on that part of the ad hoc. Whoever wants to go first. I just have a question because it does the last version of the charter, which was 09. Is that correct?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com