Public speakers urge Danbury commission to keep mayoral term at two years

Public commenters at the Danbury Charter Revision Commission’s May 6 meeting urged commissioners not to extend the mayor’s term from two years to four, saying shorter terms preserve voter accountability. John Mueller, a resident of Coats Road, told the commission: "My thing is the 4 year term versus a 2 year term. I feel after a 2 year term, the people have a chance to voice their opinion based upon promises made or promises kept by the mayor."

Councilman Michael Henry said he also opposed a four-year term, arguing it would "double the amount of time residents must wait to correct poor performance, change direction or respond to decisions that don't reflect community priorities." He noted that, in Connecticut, relatively few municipalities use a four-year mayoral term.

During the public-comment period, Jeff Harold asked the commission to provide a written, bullet-pointed list explaining any advantages the commission sees in a four-year term, saying he had heard "missing pieces" in the discussion and wanted a clear rationale. The commission voted earlier in the meeting to add a public-comment period to the agenda and limited individual remarks to three minutes.

The commission did not take a formal vote on term length at the meeting. Chair Joe Brann said the commission would collect testimony and prioritize issues for future meetings, and that any charter amendment would require voter approval after the commission completes its work.