Danbury City Council Public Hearing on Charter Revision Commission Report - July 16, 2026

The Danbury City Council held a public hearing on July 16, 2026, to receive public comment on the proposed charter revisions from the Charter Revision Commission. The revisions included changes such as four-year terms for elected officials, appointing the town clerk, increasing the bonding threshold from $2 million to $5 million, adding transparency provisions for the Board of Education finances, and other modifications. The hearing featured extensive testimony from residents, with many urging the council to send the revisions to a November referendum, while others opposed the process or specific provisions.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Mayor Roberto Alves (7 West Reading Road) urged the council to send the charter revision to voters in November, stating that a vote to deny the public a referendum would take away their right to decide. He emphasized that the final decision should rest with Danbury voters.
• Jan Maria Jagish (Coach Hill Drive) supported the proposed revisions, citing benefits of four-year terms for stability, appointing the town clerk for professional qualifications, and raising the bonding threshold to reflect current costs. He argued that accountability remains through elections and public meetings.
• Melody Darrett (15 Westview Drive) shared personal concerns about safety and community connection, asking whether the charter addresses the needs of residents like young women who feel unsafe. She did not explicitly support or oppose the revisions but called for greater accountability and inclusion.
• Ellen Cook (56 Samplit Road) expressed full support for the mayor's request to send the charter to voters, favored four-year terms, and believed the town clerk should be appointed rather than elected.
• Ashley Fawn (William Street, 5th Ward) opposed the current form of the charter, raising concerns about the language defining the mayor's chief of staff. She argued that unclear boundaries between coordination and executive authority could undermine public trust, especially given her experience as a rape survivor and nonprofit founder.
• Karen Palanzo (27 Middle River Road) criticized the process, stating that the Charter Revision Commission had a preset agenda, did not provide a redlined document with explanations, and ignored public input. She noted that the final public hearing was only two months long and that the commission refused to extend the timeline despite having 16 months.
• Ray McGarigal (41 Eastgate Road) supported four-year terms and transparency for Board of Education finances, and urged the council not to play politics, allowing voters to decide.
• Mary Keating Tahan (1 East Hayestown Road, Barkley Commons) supported all changes, especially appointing the town clerk, arguing that the job is non-political and should be based on qualifications. She asked the council to send the revisions to referendum.
• Paul Bamba (3 Crestdale Drive) commended the commission and urged the council to let residents vote on the charter, stating that voters deserve the right to decide their city's constitution.
• George O'Lachlin (13 Maple Bridge Road) supported four-year terms, Board of Education transparency, and appointed town clerk, emphasizing that the council should allow voters to decide.
• Henry Hall (6 Flirtation Drive) supported the revisions as "good enough" and urged the council to pass them so voters can have a say.
• Keegan Willemson (43 Saddle Rock Road) supported the revisions for efficiency, continuity, and transparency, and asked the council to put the matter to a public vote.
• Lynn Waller (83 Highland Avenue) opposed the process, stating that the commission ignored her suggestions and those of other residents. She specifically objected to four-year terms for the Board of Education (preferring staggered terms), mayoral appointment of the town clerk (preferring civil service or election), legislative assistant appointment by the council, and the high signature threshold for referendums (10% in 30 days). She warned that if no changes are made, she would vote no in November.
• Lorraine Herger (Southern Boulevard) opposed the current form of the charter, citing concerns about four-year terms without term limits, increased bonding without referendum, and appointment powers centralizing power in the mayor. She argued that the issues raised by the public were not addressed and that the charter should be revised before going to voters.
• Kate Canada (Topfield Road) raised concerns about Section 618 regarding the Board of Education, stating that the language may conflict with state statute and potentially expose sensitive student data under FERPA. She urged the council to consider these risks before sending the charter to voters.
• Elvis Novas (Forest Example Place) supported the revisions, arguing that four-year terms provide stability for long-term projects and that accountability is maintained through elections. He asked the council to let voters make the final decision.
• General Pine (14 Lilly Drive) supported appointing the town clerk, citing the technical nature of the job and the need for continuity, especially as a realtor who works with clerks in the region.
• Randall Michael (Juniper Ridge Drive) supported four-year terms and asked the council to pass the revision so voters can decide.
• Debbie Rizzo (46 Old Musket Lane) opposed the charter as currently written, particularly the appointed town clerk and four-year terms, and argued the process was rushed.
• Michelle Coelho (47 East Lake Road, Chair of Danbury Republican Town Committee) opposed the process, stating that the Republican Town Committee was excluded from nominating members. She argued against four-year terms for the Board of Education (removing staggered elections) and the appointed town clerk, saying these changes remove the voice of the people. She urged the council to reject the charter.
• Irving Fox (10 Clappard Ridge Road) opposed the elimination of staggered terms for the Board of Education, noting that the current four-year terms with staggering provide continuity and mentorship. He warned that removing staggering would lead to inexperienced boards dependent on the superintendent.
• John Cook (152 South King Street) supported four-year terms for stability, Board of Education transparency, and appointed town clerk, noting that the position requires specialized skills.
• Natalie Mago (136 Pembroke Road) urged the council to reject the current form, expressing concern about democracy and women's voices, though she did not specify which provisions she opposed.
• Eva Vega (3 Crane Street) supported sending the revisions to voters, stating that decisions about the charter should be made by the people, not the council.
• Letter from Jan Gagler (former town clerk, 10 Old Hayrake Road, read by a speaker) opposed the charter changes, warning that eliminating the elected town clerk and centralizing authority would weaken checks and balances. The letter also opposed four-year terms, legislative assistant appointment by the mayor, and other provisions, and called for codifying protections for city employees.
• Paul McAllister (reading for Warren Levy, Mabel Avenue) opposed the charter, stating that the commission's process was flawed with only 11 hours of public meetings, conflicts of interest, and minimal transparency. He argued that the current charter works well and the changes centralize power, urging a no vote.
• Mark Stanton (6 Tangle Wood Drive) supported four-year terms, using his own learning curve as a teacher and Trader Joe's employee to illustrate the time needed to become effective.
• Gary Simone (5 Dogwood Drive) supported the charter revisions and also raised the issue of minority representation, sharing his personal experience of winning an election but losing due to the minority representation rule, which he felt undermined voter will.
• Denise Minson (93 Park Avenue) supported four-year terms with term limits, and preferred the town clerk be a civil service position rather than elected or appointed.
• Joan Belisna (179 Cohenza Street) supported four-year terms for the mayor, Board of Education transparency, and letting voters decide, noting that it saves money and attracts residents.
• Kathleen Troy (92 Park Avenue) thanked the commission, noting eight meetings, supported four-year terms, and urged the council to move forward to a referendum.
• Larry Reifberg (6 Irviee Drive) supported the commission's recommendations and asked the council to respect their work and let voters decide in November, stating that democracy is messy but the best form of government.
• Vacovitz (Statis Avenue) opposed rushing the process, arguing that the council should take time to get it right rather than meet a November deadline. He disagreed with the mayor's claim that a no vote takes away voter rights, noting that a properly revised charter would eventually go to a vote.
• Farley Santos (27 Westview Drive) supported sending the revisions to voters, emphasizing that the process was transparent and that the council should trust the people of Danbury to decide.
• Al Robinson (7 Melrose Avenue) opposed the current process, stating that the council has the authority to make changes and send recommendations back to the commission. He questioned the mayor's appointment of commission members who contributed to his campaign, the short 11-hour meeting total, and the lack of transparency. He urged the council to ask questions before sending the charter to voters.
• Jennifer Doran (Long Ridge Road, Assistant Town Clerk) opposed the appointed town clerk proposal, preferring a hired (civil service) position for continuity and expertise. She noted that the commission did not consult the town clerk's office and that the duties are technical and state-mandated.

Key Outcomes

• The public hearing was formally closed after a motion. The council then took a 10-minute recess before proceeding to the committee of the whole session. No vote was taken on the charter revision during the public hearing. The council will continue deliberation in the committee of the whole.