Letter To The Editor: Shrinking RTM Is Solution In Search Of A Problem

The following open letter to the Fairfield Charter Revision Commission and the Board of Selectpersons is by resident Kathryn Braun:

To the Charter Revision Commission
Cc: Board of Selectmen

In light of new material presented late last Thursday night after public comment closed, would you please add another public comment session – the handout provided at the end of the 7/28/22 CRC meeting wasn’t posted until Friday, 7/29.

I repeat my request that the CRC take its time to allow vacationing families to return, and that the BOS NOT finalize its report until August 8, to enable the questions to go on the 2023 election year.

The handout purports to provide certain metrics that support the reduction by 46 percent of the cap of the RTM size from 56 to 30. However, it contains basically the same arguments with data on absentee rates and ordinance quantities etc.

No problem exists that warrants shrinking the legislative branch- this is a threshold question that has not been answered- shrinking the RTM is simply a solution in search of a problem. There has been no documented objective viable evidence that the RTM needs to be reduced to be an effective legislative arm of our government. In fact, there appears to be no actual claim of the RTM being ineffective at its current charter cap of 56 or its current self-determined size of 40. Dozens of current and former RTM members have stated the opposite- that this proposed change will damage its ability to effectively represent constituents.

It isn't even alleged that the RTM is currently ineffective: one would expect concrete specifics about the ineffectiveness of the RTM backed by evidence, followed by evidence that the only way to fix the problem is to shrink the RTM by 46 percent rather than say, to give it a budget, staffing, research capability, and its own legal counsel. Instead, you have had current and former RTM members inform you that cutting its size will actually cause harm in effectiveness.

Accountability and Attendance and ordinances- Attendance is not the same as accountability- in a legislative body the way to hold elected representatives of your district accountable is to vote them out next term. Unfortunately, shrinking the size would result in each party having that much more control over candidates, leading to less accountability as each major party selects those that will vote the party way without truly independent views.

Similarly, the number of ordinances is not indicative of either accountability or of the RTM’s effectiveness- ordinances are drafted and passed to take care of our Town’s need- if no need, please don’t pass ordinances!

Incrementalism - Moving towards a mayor-manager- council form- the fact is, that the CRC rejected that model and retained the BOS-BOF-RTM model. Unless and until some future CRC makes that recommendation, after hopefully using the full 16 months of study that the law allows, it's irrelevant to the discussion. You can't have an RTM model but simply shrink it to make it look like, but not actually be that other model of government that was rejected. They are apples and oranges.

Size of other towns legislative bodies- the only valid comparison is to those other towns that have RTMs- and Fairfield's is the smallest RTM per capita in the state. Fairfield's RTM is only about 1/5 the size per population of Greenwich, Darien and Westport's RTM, on average. The legislative bodies being compared that are NOT RTM bodies are irrelevant to the discussion, because the CRC rejected those other forms of government.

Technology and today's world – can as easily support keeping the RTM large, because it is that much easier to handle the logistics of a larger body using digital means.

Sincerely,
Kathryn Braun
Fairfield, CT