[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6054347,"mediaKeyId","3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312","parentId",3338735,"title","Charter summary corrected: Flood, resilience and erosion board membership increased to seven","audioSeconds",40,"startMs",3258000,"endMs",3298000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312&start=3258&end=3298","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312/thumbnail_3258000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6054347/Connecticut/Charter-summary-corrected-Flood-resilience-and-erosion-board-membership-increased-to-seven","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6054347-1b8d95cd857c8eb1b4b64bd3a3a84e5d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998518&Signature=QAaiMG2dM0S6qbRbJOweyKl9QHAsfQjwlVj3pbs4wnv5WbjkS-HUHSSXJKQZQrSiFNh-EB4mdAGOdwwKfuZBw82I3AZMr91tBmm2vCXBuLz0VD-OPBsy8k2u2LIHjoo-mdf9e-O8gqPjBSSG9E9OmTskl6iDBuQXRh8y11JMNoPzSsjK9rbKVKfU3LIeq-Xo5v0JKxKumkjxFMqYEPSvPAT152LYm4Mhq6twSJn5ZvKcHO82Nhb6t6UAPBBTcWTaPug6SkIo7eW-vgtTyn45aoAUIdLkJCsLlvaemBu6AaDvo1ausJVFrx0wQ28xINV7dYnR1OHs4Ho9No6noFsPkA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town Council of Fairfield, CT","date","2025-05-11T00:00:00Z","article","Commissioners discovered a clerical inconsistency in the draft charter’s summary pages May 8: the Flood Prevention, Climate Resilience and Erosion Control Board was shown with five members in the summary but the body text and commenters indicated the correct composition is seven members.

The commission moved to correct the summary to list seven members. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote.

Why it matters: Accurate summaries matter for public understanding; the body text already specified seven members and the commission acted to align the summary with the charter language.

Outcome: The CRC approved the correction and directed staff to update the summary and republish the draft packet to the Town Clerk for distribution to the Board of Selectmen.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Fairfield 05/08/25 Charter Revision Commission","oneSentenceSummary","The commission identified and corrected an inconsistency in the draft charter summary: the Flood Prevention, Climate Resilience and Erosion Control Board is a seven‑member body, not five. Commissioners voted to amend the summary to reflect the body text.","taxTitle","Fairfield, Fairfield, Connecticut","taxId",57943,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6054351,"Charter debate: termination clauses, terms and employment agreements draw sustained discussion",560,4471000,5031000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312&start=4471&end=5031","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312/thumbnail_4471000.jpg","/articles/6054351/Connecticut/Charter-debate-termination-clauses-terms-and-employment-agreements-draw-sustained-discussion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6054351-031b8456c86fc4a7c0f8d2aa22c92ef3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998518&Signature=HVHAs-x4flohc2xcjmH2ofMhzay7sHU3R1bS~Css-GK7bj-SNMLqWa1gFF05rsOINaQKCpzngaAG~bG4tNQCBGXYBUYhRhAHLEmihV3MsFJRUWHgnd35F-F2H4NWrrMkylZUJmQIYhnBvJvtMHgvUfFdtvQl8bJQlcgzvmbPasN-EVu7~658JCIj-avUVEEWDYgmBYvZPFBWa6IcPnP4ZwhattFyGWs03NCF3Zn0YcnFGvHA~ZQYse2BYN5oDdK6qKJEw3eT6UyHBu0~0T2KJFJ09dv2LZFEORDLnJ1b4IMB5Mzr9xPfv9MhLLh4EN-zDOeJiFsI~-30piaPybmFMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Commissioners spent a lengthy portion of the meeting reviewing language about terms of office and whether appointed town officers should be removable without cause.

What was discussed: The CRC considered three approaches: (1) keep the draft language that allows removal without cause and thus a default “at‑will” baseline, (2) define fixed term lengths for certain appointed officials (for example, four‑year terms tied to the First Selectman’s election cycle), or (3) rely on written employment agreements and collective bargaining to define removal procedures for specific offices.

Why it matters: Whether an official serves at will or on a defined term affects recruitment, retention and possible litigation exposure. Department heads and other town officers said they were concerned about politicizing appointments if fixed terms align with electoral cycles; others urged clarity to avoid inconsistent legal interpretations by successive town attorneys.

Legal and practical points: Town counsel explained past practice has been inconsistent: some town attorneys treated certain appointments as coterminous with the First Selectman’s term, while others treated them as indefinite appointments removable only for cause. The CRC kept a baseline statement that certain positions are removable without cause but preserved language acknowledging that employment agreements or collective bargaining agreements supersede charter defaults.

Outcome: The commission did not impose new fixed terms across appointed offices. Instead members agreed the charter should state the baseline (removal without cause) while allowing specific employment agreements to define different terms or removal protections. Commissioners asked staff to ensure the draft references existing protections and to highlight where collective bargaining or contracts apply.

Next steps: The CRC will forward the draft with this baseline language to the Board of Selectmen and continue to accept public comment; members noted the importance of transparency about where contracts or statutory protections modify the charter baseline.","Commissioners debated whether to enshrine ‘removal without cause’ for appointed officials or to require defined terms; the CRC left baseline language in place while clarifying the draft remains subject to employment agreements and collective bargaining where applicable.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6054356,"Commission votes to remove newly added RTM confirmation requirement for appointments",842,3023000,3865000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312&start=3023&end=3865","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312/thumbnail_3023000.jpg","/articles/6054356/Connecticut/Commission-votes-to-remove-newly-added-RTM-confirmation-requirement-for-appointments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6054356-0f46251bf83c18032d676717728d781d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998518&Signature=M5Bapn4HKdf3tF9qhSqAvcVxv~3qXouYNTSehnj83RAG3XysTaaU~rcGUo1D1nJDcqVh9xfMaFg8rs~j5woMlww6gSQ74x8jbHOfnfcpQDFzyIYp-X3xcu4iq9UzOySzZt6p2ukvoWUPQ-9w-kCeznFGNmuqqT7Ge2J0doQ3ov3Bs8ZGi9KBL0V6rbielmh~zNX1nWZzn5qtlCUWhddMI7kFE7e5AVnXqHi6Xq9FNVYbcqnJVf-YqBWVf0awlMUNlS8bZ8r6-3soNJlv84f6jz2fURNsk1Ny5SVvCYjzQpGONM7fR7yVHD7f1cK~jSYwfRePrHfy~4E5AWE3ouxDNg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Charter Revision Commission voted May 8 to remove newly added language in the draft charter that would have required RTM confirmation for appointments to many town boards and commissions.

The discussion began after commissioners reviewed public comments expressing concern that adding RTM confirmation would lengthen appointment timelines and politicize otherwise administrative positions. Commissioners examined the existing charter, which already assigns appointment authority differently across bodies: most boards are appointed by the Board of Selectmen, some by the Board of Selectmen with RTM involvement, and only the Conservation Commission is currently a First Selectman appointment under the existing charter.

Why it matters: Changing who appoints board and commission members affects how local policy and oversight bodies are constituted and can lengthen appointment processes. Several commissioners and commenters argued that requiring RTM approval across many appointments would add meetings and delay filling vacancies; others said RTM involvement could increase transparency and minority representation.

The CRC debated the practical effects — including the potential for only occasional, symbolic rejections of nominees — and looked at examples from other towns. After discussion, Commissioner (Chair) moved to “return the appointment process for all boards and commissions to the current charter” (i.e., remove the RTM‑approval language added earlier in the draft), excluding the Conservation Commission language that already differs in the existing charter. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.

Related votes: The commission also amended the Flood Prevention, Climate Resilience and Erosion Control Board membership from five to seven members after an error was identified; that change was adopted by vote. Later the full draft charter (with these edits) was approved for submission to the Town Clerk and Board of Selectmen.

The commission directed staff to send the final draft, the summary report, and public comments to the Town Clerk for transmission to the Board of Selectmen. The Board of Selectmen will hold its own public hearing on the draft and may provide recommendations back to the CRC under the statutory process.","After public comment and debate, the Charter Revision Commission voted to remove recently added language requiring RTM confirmation for appointments to boards and commissions and to return most appointment authority to the prior charter process.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6054361,"Charter panel leaves chief operating officer as First Selectman appointee, keeps ex officio limits",1903,1116000,3019000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312&start=1116&end=3019","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3338735-e5a4fc23d2145c9a2a8fa1f562915312/thumbnail_1116000.jpg","/articles/6054361/Connecticut/Charter-panel-leaves-chief-operating-officer-as-First-Selectman-appointee-keeps-ex-officio-limits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6054361-69cb140e78ebbb78f068f25646df0567/orig.mp4?Expires=1770998518&Signature=A91Kt~tBGrF0PdkKV29nHYdzmGPd1uxMbILFf6MR4KOVowV62HpLZhWo-CyaJP0zZFeFAHbuJf9rBHRdjixpDSAhAk6bzxgi1yTpWr8bU-Ox5KANykvJbM6DEiwef9EAhNAi3sb6nAFeC5P4h7z-Y-TwF26fyEFsd8cmEtOttE6jDQfzfPD~rpGyjBikf6uQPD1YZJKboSP8-nZrueuup50fpZaCn7XybAfJyHrAA7PkmHIo27SwzFKNnQDITnE0-bY6zVTOwqIfT5zkRWb93sNb8i227ZW73tullUcgI32l7hOuUCtPQauVKzeeSjMYdk~833qyfzrFoivPWgTBeg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Charter Revision Commission voted May 8 to leave intact language naming the First Selectman as the appointing authority for a proposed chief operating officer and to retain the provision that the COO be “ex officio without vote.”

Commissioners spent more than an hour debating how much authority the COO should have and whether the role should be insulated from short-term politics. The commission considered proposals to have the Board of Selectmen confirm the appointment, to require a formal nomination-plus-confirmation step, or to give the COO a fixed multi‑year term to overlap administrations. No change to appointing authority or the draft ex officio language was adopted.

Why it matters: The COO is intended to act as the first Selectman’s chief administrator, attending commission meetings and representing administration priorities. Commissioners and callers said clarity is needed on whether the COO can make motions, participate in executive sessions or otherwise exercise powers beyond discussion. Those questions affect how the town’s daily administration will interact with appointed boards and boards’ independence.

Most commissioners said they supported a participatory but noncontrolling role for the COO. Commissioner McHenry and others argued the position should be “streamlining” rather than a replacement for elected officials; Commissioner Gerber stressed the office should give the First Selectman tools to run government. CRC attorney Jason Buschbaum explained the standard parliamentary meaning of ex officio: “An ex officio member is a member without vote of the body who can make motions, second others' motions, but can't second a motion made by an ex officio member.”

Commissioners asked whether an ex officio COO could attend executive session. Town counsel Phil (town attorney) advised that attendance for executive session generally follows FOIA rules and that non-members may be invited when their testimony or presence is necessary. Commissioners explored narrower language to preserve discussion rights while preventing the COO from directing votes or routinely moving motions on boards. A motion to “keep the language as is” (retaining ex officio without vote) was made, seconded and carried by voice vote.

The commission also considered, but did not adopt, an amendment to create a guaranteed multi-year term for the COO. Some residents had suggested a 6‑year minimum so the office would bridge administrations; several commissioners opposed embedding a quasi‑town‑manager term in the charter rather than leaving the option open via employment agreements.

The commission closed the COO item after clarifying that the current draft reads “ex officio without vote,” and after voting to leave appointment authority with the First Selectman and to retain the ex officio, nonvoting status as written.

Looking ahead: Commissioners asked staff and counsel to confirm draft language will make clear that ex officio status permits participation in discussion but not voting or making motions that would effectively place the COO in the same role as an appointed board member. The commission agreed to forward the full draft charter, including this COO language, to the Board of Selectmen for review.","The Fairfield Charter Revision Commission discussed the proposed Chief Operating Officer position at length and voted to keep appointment authority with the First Selectman and retain the draft language making the COO an ex officio, nonvoting participant on boards and commissions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Charter summary corrected: Flood, resilience and erosion board membership increased to seven

Charter debate: termination clauses, terms and employment agreements draw sustained discussion

Commission votes to remove newly added RTM confirmation requirement for appointments

Charter panel leaves chief operating officer as First Selectman appointee, keeps ex officio limits