Thomas Breen photo
Charter Revision Vice-Chair and Board of Alders Majority Leader Richard Furlow (right) at a recent aldermanic committee meeting.
Charter revisers took a step towards endorsing four-year terms for mayors and alders — and a step away from allowing city department heads to live outside of New Haven.
That was the upshot of Wednesday evening’s most recent meeting of the Charter Revision Commission. The meeting took place in-person in the Aldermanic Chamber on the second floor of City Hall.
The commissioners voted in support of a draft charter revision document to which the public will have a chance to respond at a hearing next week.
As part of that vote, the commissioners included all but one of the ten recommendations set forth by the mayor and Board of Alders president at the start of this once-every-ten-years process.
One key provision that did make it into the draft would extend terms for mayor, alder, and city clerk from two years to four years each.
The one recommended item that did not make it into the draft would have scrapped the city’s current residency requirements for all department heads except for the police chief, fire chief, and the various departmental coordinators, like the chief administrative officer and community services administrator.
All of that means that: if the document that won early-stage support from charter revisers Wednesday night ultimately takes effect, New Haven mayors and alders and city clerks would serve four-year terms, and all city department heads would still have to live in New Haven.
Ultimately, the Charter Revision Commission will pass along a set of recommendations to the Board of Alders in May. The alders will then take a vote on what charter-revising question or questions should be on the ballot in November. Then city voters will get the final say on whether or not the changes should be made.
To Stagger Or Not To Stagger?
Laura Glesby Photos
Anne Schwartz: Do more frequent elections help voter turnout?
At Wednesday’s meeting, commissioners did not focus on the question of how long mayoral, aldermanic and city clerk terms should last — all seemed to have reached a consensus around four-year terms.
Instead, at the center of debate was how to time the elections for those terms: whether to elect all three positions on the same day every four years, or whether to stagger alder elections so that they occur at every halfway point of a mayor’s term.
A staggered term system would give voters an opportunity to affect the course of government mid-way through the mayor’s term, by way of the legislative body elections. An aligned term system, meanwhile, would consolidate the number of election years that both voters and city government have to contend with.
First, commissioners questioned how the timing and frequency of local elections could affect voter turnout.
Commissioner Patricia Melton noted that some people experience “election fatigue” from voting every two years, arguing that “the one where everyone runs together is a preferable choice.”
Meanwhile, Anne Schwartz, the commission’s secretary, pointed to some theories indicating that more frequent elections can actually boost voter turnout, as citizens are able to make a habit out of voting.
Richard Furlow, the commission’s vice chair who also represents upper Westville and Amity on the Board of Alders and serves as the alders’ majority leader, argued that in context of New Haven, where alders each represent a relatively small portion of the city compared to other towns, “I don’t think residents would have the stomach to vote for alders on their own line.”
Furlow argued that elections affecting legislative and executive seats at the same time are “very vibrant.” He also noted that every additional election incurs costs to the city; a given citywide election costs the city about $550,000, Furlow said.
Under the proposed aligned term system, the alders, mayor, and city clerk would face elections in November 2025 for four-year terms beginning in January 2026.
Commissioner and Morris Cove Alder Sal DeCola asked about the Board of Education’s two elected positions — which are up for election this November, before a revised charter would be able to take effect, for four-year terms.
The commissioners decided to sync the Board of Ed terms with the mayor’s, alders’, and city clerk’s in their proposed charter revisions. They suggested that in 2027, at the end of the upcoming four-year term, elected Board of Ed representatives could run for a two-year term — and then, by 2029, four-year Board of Ed terms would resume in line with four-year terms for the other city positions.
Commissioners unanimously approved this plan, with aligned four-year terms for the positions in question, for a draft set of revisions ahead of the public hearing on Tuesday, May 9.
Where Should Dept. Heads Live?
Deputy Corporation Counsel Catherine LaMarr: There may be a middle ground?
One topic of lively debate among commissioners Wednesday was the question of whether certain department heads should be required to live in New Haven.
Ahead of the charter review process, Mayor Justin Elicker had proposed eliminating current New Haven residency requirements for 22 department heads — excluding the police chief, fire chief, chief administrative officer, controller, community services administrator, and economic development administrator.
In December, Elicker argued that as the city faces a wide array of vacancies, removing the residency requirement for department heads would enable the city to more easily recruit new hires. “We always want to advocate for people who work for the city to live in the city,” he said at the time. “For certain department heads that is crucial, like public safety. You want your police chief and fire chief living in the city, being close. But for others, it’s not necessary, and the residency requirement makes the city much less competitive and able to hire.”
The proposal to eliminate residency requirements for the department head positions received pushback from some commissioners Wednesday.
“It is really important that New Haveners get a chance at these jobs,” argued Melton, who asked about the kind of message it would send to residents if the requirement were removed. Melton suggested that the city’s challenges hiring for city positions reflect other roadblocks, like relatively low pay compared to other towns and private sector jobs.
“I’ve talked to many people and they feel very strongly about this,” Melton added.
Commissioner Sandra Trevino noted that only 22 jobs would be affected by the elimination of a residency requirement.
There are loopholes around the current residency requirement, Furlow noted: “We currently have department heads who have a house in another town and rent an apartment in New Haven” for the purposes of meeting the requirement.
The commissioners discussed potentially retaining the residency requirement, while creating a process by which the mayor could request that the Board of Alders waive that requirement for specific candidates.
Deputy Corporation Counsel Catherine LaMarr offered a message to commissioners from Corporation Counsel Patricia King: “The corporation counsel recommends that if you go down the waiver route, that you have a set of standards” that candidates would need to qualify, rather than allowing alders to make “arbitrary” decisions about a candidate.
Schwartz and Melton said they were amenable to a waiver system.
Trevino expressed reservations. If a residency requirement remained on job postings, “Wouldn’t it deter people from applying to begin with, before they even get to the waiver?” she asked.
LaMarr noted that commissioners could also try a “middle ground” compromise by which “if you’re a New Haven resident, you’re a preferred candidate.”
Furlow added that the commission could consider whether specific department head positions warrant a residency requirement.
Ultimately, commissioners voted to take no action on the item, leaving in residency requirements for now. Two commissioners — Trevino and Jack Keyes — cast dissenting votes.
The commission can continue to ponder and potentially act on the question at Tuesday’s meeting.
See below for previous articles about this year’s Charter Revision Commission process.
• Immortality Loophole Looms For Board Lifers
• To Split Or Not To Split Traffic & Police Boards
• Charter Revisers Eye Alder Pay Bump
• If It’s Good Enough For Hartford, Middletown
• Elicker Administration Pitches 4‑Year Terms
• Union Targets Mayor’s Ed Board Influence
• Ready. Set. Revise!
• 9 Approved For Charter Revision Commission
• Alders Establish Charter Revision Commission
• 4‑Year Terms Back Up For Debate
NO to four year terms. It would decrease democracy and opportunities to change our government. New Haven Republicans are FOR a more elected Board of Education and a HARD no on four year terms for anyone, but ESPECIALLY NO to the "do what the mayor tells us" alders.