Failed Danbury Charter Review

Danbury's charter is our city's constitution, and any rewrite must follow the charter's own rules. This revision did not. The required 10‑year review and Ad Hoc Committee never occurred, and the commission was formed without the independence or expertise needed for constitutional work.

Legal counsel failed to give the commission the most basic guidance: a charter must contain structure, not operations. That's why the draft is filled with day‑to‑day mandates, department duties, board procedures, personnel rules, procurement workflows, even governance requirements for outside nonprofits. These belong in ordinance, not the charter.

Subscribe

The draft also proposes a four‑year mayoral term and elected officials which weakens accountability. Longer terms mean fewer voter check‑ins and slower correction when leadership fails. Good mayors earn re‑election; bad mayors shouldn't get four uninterrupted years.

Public input was ignored, best‑practice standards were not followed, and accountability is weakened. Danbury should vote NO and demand a lawful, disciplined charter review.