Danbury City Council and Charter Revision Commission Joint Conference on 14 Charter Recommendations - July 27, 2026

This joint conference, mandated by Connecticut General Statute Section 7-191, was held on July 27, 2026, at 3:00 PM. The purpose was for the City Council to confer with the Charter Revision Commission on 14 specific recommendations for changes to the draft charter report. Council President Peter Bazade presided. The council had previously voted on these recommendations; the commission asked questions to understand the council's rationale. No votes or decisions were made during the conference itself; the commission will deliberate and vote on the recommendations in a separate meeting.

Discussion Items

• Recommendation 1: Amend preamble to include "taxpayer." No questions from the commission.

• Recommendation 2: Change "appointed" to "nominated" throughout the charter. Commissioner asked if this change applies only to positions requiring council confirmation. Councilman Rotello explained the motion was to ensure consistency, except for reappointments where "appointed" remains. The vote was 20-1 in favor.

• Recommendation 3: Remove staggered terms for the Board of Education. Commissioner Safranic asked for the rationale. Councilman Coello stated the concern was losing experienced members if all 11 seats turned over at once. Councilwoman Robinson added that holding elections for a small number every two years allows focus on the Board of Ed and ensures continuity for disciplinary hearings. The vote was 13-8.

• Recommendation 4: Replace "designated" with "appointed" in Section 2-4. No questions.

• Recommendation 5: Strike revisions to Section 2-8 (oaths) and either refer to state statute or include both options. Council explained the need to allow either an oath or affirmation, per individual choice. No further questions.

• Recommendation 6: Remove "elected" from Section 3-6 (membership). Councilwoman Lapine stated that not all members are elected (some appointed), so the term should be "entire membership."

• Recommendation 7: Change all references to "state statutes" to "general statutes" for legal consistency. No questions.

• Recommendation 8: Amend Section 3-13 to include "ad hoc, standing, or committees of the whole." Commissioner asked why there were six no votes. President Bazade ruled the question irrelevant to the conference scope; discussion was not pursued.

• Recommendation 9: Include language in Section 4-1 requiring gifts to the city to be reported to the council. Commissioner asked for clarification on the reporting mechanism (direct report vs. finance communication). Council confirmed they want a direct report to the council.

• Recommendation 10: Keep the town clerk position elected rather than appointed. Councilman Hawley explained the reasons: the appointment model as presented was incomplete (terms, removal, qualifications, safeguards) and that appointing the clerk could risk election integrity. Commissioner Safranic asked if those concerns were addressed, would he support an appointed clerk. Hawley said yes, but the council's recommendation is to keep it elected.

• Recommendation 11: Refer all of Section 6-18 (Board of Education financial oversight) back to the commission for further refinement. Councilwoman Robinson expressed worries about mission creep and student data privacy (FERPA). She suggested a data use agreement rather than "full access." Council discussed concerns triggered by past financial mismanagement (2019-2024). Commissioner noted that the Board of Ed's counsel had agreed to most language except the "shall" requirement for reports.

• Recommendation 12: Related to Section 6-18, further define financial information requirements. (Discussed jointly with #11.)

• Recommendation 13: Require a two-thirds council confirmation vote for department heads in Section 6-4. Councilman Hawley and Chinese explained the need for consistency across department head appointments. Commissioner raised concern that eight members could block appointments; council acknowledged it is a recommendation for consideration.

• Recommendation 14: Reinstate Section 8-2 (deletion of entire section) to protect the incumbent IT director from forced reappointment. Councilman Chinese stated the charter as drafted would require the current IT director to go through a new appointment process, and the recommendation aims to grandfather the position.

Key Outcomes

• The conference concluded after the council and commission discussed all 14 recommendations. The council voted to adjourn from the conference (motion and second, all in favor). The commission took a break before proceeding to their own meeting to deliberate and vote on the recommendations.
• No action was taken by the council or commission during the conference; the recommendations will be considered by the Charter Revision Commission in a subsequent session.