By Peter Barhydt
The New Canaan Charter Revision Commission spent most of its recent meeting on Tuesday examining fundamental questions about local governance, accountability and public trust, with an extended and at times pointed discussion over whether members of the Planning and Zoning Commission should continue to be appointed or be elected.
The Charter Revision Commission (CRC) was established by the Town Council on Oct. 15, 2025, and charged with reviewing the Town Charter in its entirety. The CRC is empowered to recommend revisions that add, delete, update, clarify or retain charter provisions, with a first draft report due to the Town Council by May 4, 2026.
Chair Kathleen Corbet led the CRC in hearing public comments and updates on the CRC’s subcommittees but then focused the meeting on testimony from Planning and Zoning officials, and land use professionals.
Public Comment Raises Accountability Concerns
During public comment, longtime New Canaan resident Roy Abramowitz criticized the town’s current governance structure, arguing that appointed boards concentrate power and reduce accountability to residents.
Abramowitz described the system as “autocratic” and said that appointing boards through the Board of Selectmen allows decisions to be made without sufficient responsiveness to the electorate.
“When a town commission ignores extensive records and the safety of neighborhood children, there is no reportable responsibility to the populace,” he said, arguing that elected boards would be more representative of and responsive to community concerns.
Abramowitz suggested that zoning and planning decisions in particular would benefit from being subject to electoral accountability, especially as New Canaan continues to grow.
Public Survey Gaining Responses
The CRC also received an update on its public input survey, which is intended to gather resident perspectives on the town charter and municipal governance.
Commissioner Jennifer Holme reported that as of the meeting, 37 residents had completed the survey, nearly doubling the total from just days earlier. The survey has been promoted through town staff communications, the First Selectman’s newsletter, local media outlets, community organizations and political party mailing lists.
Holme said responses will be compiled every two weeks and shared with commissioners, including verbatim comments as well as aggregated data. Raw data, including names and addresses, will be available to commissioners for review, while summarized results will be included in public packets.
Chair Corbet emphasized that the survey remains open, and encouraged continued participation, noting that it is posted on the Charter Revision Commission’s page on the town website.
Working Groups Report Progress
CRC members also heard updates from its three working groups, which are reviewing different sections of the charter, and interviewing town boards and officials.
Group One, chaired by Angela Jameson, is examining the issue of elections versus appointments, and reviewing Article I of the charter. Jameson said the group is preparing a neutral report outlining the pros and cons of each governance model, along with broader considerations commissioners should weigh when evaluating specific boards.
Commissioner Joseph Palo said Article I currently contains a wide range of provisions added over decades and would benefit from clarification.
“We’ve identified about six areas that are actionable and broadly agreed upon,” Palo said, including potential recommendations regarding the town seal and the terminology used for boards and commissions.
CRC commissioners are also interviewing town officials, including the superintendent of schools, Board of Education members, Inland Wetlands commissioners, and the town clerk.
Group Two and Group Three reported that interviews with the Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance, Zoning Board of Appeals, and other commissions are underway, with the goal of completing most interviews by the end of February.
Planning and Zoning Officials Push Back on Election Proposal, Cite Risks
The latter portion of the meeting was devoted almost entirely to Planning and Zoning, which has emerged as one of the most debated areas of the charter review.
Planning and Zoning Chairman Dan Radman addressed the CRC at length, arguing strongly in favor of retaining the current appointment system.
Radman, an architect who has served on the commission since 2011 and as chair since 2022, said New Canaan’s Planning and Zoning Commission benefits from a deep bench of experienced members selected for their professional expertise rather than their ability to campaign.
“Appointing commissioners allows the town to select individuals with specific knowledge and experience,” Radman said. “It also helps insulate long-term planning decisions from short-term political pressures.”
Radman outlined what he described as a rigorous vetting process involving political parties, the First Selectman’s office, and interviews conducted by Planning and Zoning leadership. He argued that elected commissions could discourage qualified professionals—such as architects, engineers, and attorneys—from serving due to employer restrictions on political activity.
Former Planning and Zoning Chairman Laszlo Papp, who could not attend, submitted a letter that was read into the record. Papp wrote that, based on his direct experience with neighboring towns, elected planning and zoning commissions often face greater political pressure and internal conflicts.
Papp noted that he had regular meetings with peer Planning and Zoning chairs in neighboring towns. “I learned that the towns whose P&Z members were elected had many more problems and difficulties, in contrast to New Canaan where members of the P&Z enjoyed friendly discussions and usually made unanimous decisions. The P&Z chairmen of the towns represented by elected members often complained that they made decisions often based on political considerations, and not on the merits of the issue. They complained that they had many disagreements.”
“The current appointment system assures that New Canaan selects its Planning and Zoning members based on merit and not politics,” Papp wrote.
Legal Framework and Quasi-Judicial Role Explained
Town Planner and Zoning Enforcement Officer Sarah Carey provided a detailed overview of the legal framework governing land-use boards, emphasizing that many Planning and Zoning decisions are quasi-judicial in nature, and must be based solely on evidence in the public record and state law.
Carey explained that commissioners are prohibited from private communications with applicants, neighbors or elected officials regarding pending or likely applications, a restriction intended to prevent claims of bias or predetermination.
“These rules are intentional, and essential to maintaining the integrity of the decision-making process,” Carey said, noting that they apply whether commissioners are elected or appointed.
Town Attorney Nicholas Bamonte echoed those concerns, warning that informal communications or campaign statements could increase the town’s exposure to legal challenges.
“One of the most common grounds for appeals is alleged bias or predetermination,” Bamonte said. “Those claims can be fueled by statements made outside the formal process.”
Several speakers questioned how elected Planning and Zoning commissioners could campaign without compromising those legal standards.
Broader Perspectives from Commissioners and Professionals
Planning and Zoning Commissioner John Kriz said New Canaan’s current system has helped produce a walkable downtown, diverse housing options, and strong environmental and historic preservation.
“Our town has been blessed for decades with an independent, objective, and energetic team,” Kriz said, adding that an elected Planning and Zoning Commission risks introducing single-issue agendas and special-interest influence.
Kriz went on to cite not only the comments from former Planning and Zoning chairman Papp (unaffiliated), and current chairman Radman (Republican), but also prior testimony to the CRC from former Planning and Zoning chairman John Goodwin (Democrat), all of whom argued against elected planning and zoning commissioners. “I think this is what’s called a broad consensus,” he concluded.
Krista Nielson, Planning and Zoning Commission secretary and a professional planner who has worked in multiple states, said Connecticut’s system is among the strongest she has encountered.
“Electing planning and zoning commissioners would introduce a structural tension between popularity and legal defensibility,” Nielson said. “That tension already exists at times and would only be exacerbated by elections.”
Civil engineer Rob Frangione, who regularly appears before land-use boards across Fairfield County, also urged the CRC not to change the current system of appointed Planning and Zoning commissioners.
“Nowhere in the history of mankind did someone say, ‘Let’s add more politicians’ to solve a problem,” Frangione said, drawing laughter from the audience.
CRC Stresses Its Independent Role
Charter Revision Commission members emphasized that hearing opposition does not predetermine their recommendations.
Commissioner William Parrett said the CRC’s responsibility is to examine all perspectives, noting that not all residents are satisfied with current governance.
“Even if things work well most of the time, we can always improve communication and transparency,” Parrett said.
Several commissioners raised potential alternatives to elections, including longer terms for Planning and Zoning members, improved public education about land-use processes, and clearer guidance on how residents can access agendas, records and hearings.
Chair Corbet said communication has emerged as a recurring theme throughout the charter review.
“If there are ways to clarify processes or make them more accessible, that’s something we should look at closely,” she said.
Next Meeting
The Charter Revision Commission will meet next on Tuesday, Feb. 3, and will continue reviewing interview findings and public input. Additional special meetings are scheduled, all of which are posted on the town website and available for in-person attendance or viewing via recorded video.
Residents may continue to submit feedback through the commission’s online public input form.
