New Canaan debate: residents and council spar over elected vs. appointed boards during charter review

The New Canaan Charter Revision Commission heard more than an hour of public comment and town council testimony on Feb. 3 as residents and elected officials squared off over whether to convert major appointed bodies into elected offices.

During public comment Joseph, a resident who presented at length, urged wide charter changes and accused the current system of insufficient oversight, saying, “The charter is outdated, broken, and in need of revision.” He pointed to what he described as weak procurement controls, limited oversight of spending and audit interference as reasons for change.

Several residents pushed the commission to preserve certain elected posts. Laura Dice, who identified herself as a long-time election poll moderator, said the town clerk and treasurer should remain elected because those offices must be independent when certifying elections. “The town clerk is also responsible for certifying election results, a duty that requires impartiality and, therefore, should remain an elected position,” Dice told commissioners.

Town council members offered a range of views. Eric Tuna told the commission he favored keeping Planning & Zoning and the Board of Finance appointed to protect technical expertise and qualifications, and asked the commission to examine why some appointed bodies require council approval while others do not. “I am very strongly in favor of maintaining appointed planning and zoning commissioners and appointed board of finance members,” he said.

By contrast, other council members argued for restraint in changing the charter or proposed specific structural changes. Hillary Ormond, vice chair of the town council, urged caution about amending the charter and recommended exploring bylaws or ordinances first. “It’s not something to be amended on a whim,” she said. Mike Rogers warned the town is changing demographically and recommended expanding the Board of Selectmen from three to five members to increase transparency. Christina Ross and others urged separating audit oversight from the executive branch; Ross recommended the audit committee report to the council and proposed splitting planning and zoning into distinct commissions.

Commissioners described outreach plans for the public survey (49 responses recorded in the packet at the time) and debated whether to mail postcards with QR codes to all households, use the voter registry versus tax rolls, or wait until draft recommendations are more developed. Several commissioners said they would use multiple channels — local media, libraries and civic groups — to broaden input.

The commission took no formal policy votes on charter language at the meeting. Members asked several town officials and counsel to provide written answers to technical questions and scheduled additional public hearing time for Feb. 17 to allow more residents and council members to speak.

What’s next: The commission will accept written submissions and continue the public hearing process on Feb. 17; commissioners plan additional outreach to raise survey response rates and to review written materials submitted by town counsel and town council members.

(Reporting based on the Feb. 3, 2026 Charter Revision Commission meeting.)