Westport resident and former Representative Town Meeting member John McCarthy organized a petition, asking the RTM to review the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee’s “goals, process and proposed plans” for Parker Harding Plaza.
The petition, with the signatures of 61 electors, was delivered to the Town clerk on June 27.
On Monday, assistant town attorney (and former RTM moderator) Eileen Lavigne Flug advised RTM moderator Jeff Wieser to reject the request.
Her memo to him, as well as 1st Selectwoman Jen Tooker and Town Attorney Ira Bloom, said:
You asked me to review a petition from John McCarthy and over 20 other electors received by the Town Clerk on June 27, 2023, requesting that you place on the September 5, 2023 Representative Town Meeting (“RTM”) agenda, “A review of the [Downtown Plan Implementation Committee’s (DPIC’s)] goals, process and proposed plan for Parker Harding, to be led by the lead petitioner [John McCarthy], with an invitation of the Chair of the DPIC to present if desired, with time reserved for RTM member and public comments
following the review.”
Section C5-6(C) requires the Moderator to place on the RTM agenda “such matters as…20 electors…may request.” It is your decision as Moderator to determine whether the petition requests an agenda item that is actually within the RTM’s purview. I understand from your email to Mr. McCarthy that you have already advised him that this is not an actionable item by the RTM, and I agree.
This screenshot from the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee shows the Parker Harding lot, and its proximity to the Saugatuck River.
This memo will elaborate on legal advice I gave you in our prior discussions about this.
The Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut has stated that: “Common sense is to be employed in the construction of a charter…. A city charter … ‘must be
construed, if possible, so as reasonably to promote its ultimate purpose.’ … ‘The unreasonableness of the result obtained by the acceptance of one possible alternative interpretation of an act is a reason for rejecting that interpretation in favor of another which would provide a result that is … reasonable.’”
Section C5-6(C) cannot reasonably be read to require that any item presented as described in that section must be placed on an agenda. Moderators have determined several times in recent years that petitioned items are not appropriate for the RTM agenda, including while I myself was Moderator.
Petitions to the RTM that have been denied in the past include a petition to overturn a Planning and Zoning Site Plan and Special Permit (which the RTM does not have the authority to do), and petitions to add an RTM rule or adopt an ordinance that would conflict with the Town Charter.
The RTM has an essential role in Town government. The RTM’s role in the proposed Parker Harding reconstruction is to consider whatever upcoming appropriations may be requested by the administration and recommended by the Board of Finance. In addition, if the P&Z were to issue a negative 8-24 or approve a map or text amendment relating to the project, the RTM may be asked to review that. There will be ample time for the public to express its views on the plans and the desirability of the project at the RTM committee meetings and the meetings of the full RTM when any such item is on the agenda.
McCarthy responded to Wieser:
Thank you for sending me the attached letter from Eileen Flug regarding our certified petition to the RTM which was delivered on June 27, 2023. Having worked on the RTM with both of you, I am quite perplexed as to how you and Eileen can both take the position that the Parker Harding matter should not be put on the agenda of the September 5th meeting. You know that this is an incorrect position to be taking.
The petition was signed by 61 Westporters who all took at face value the promise of the RTM as written in its Rules of Procedure (Sec. A162-6) as appended to the Town Charter where it says.
“The Moderator or, in the event of the Moderator’s inability to act, the Deputy Moderator or, in the event of the inability of both, the Town Clerk shall place on the agenda of the Representative Town Meeting such matters as the First Selectman, two Representative Town Meeting members or 20 electors of the Town may request by written notice delivered to the Moderator or the Town Clerk not less than 14 days prior to a Representative Town Meeting,…”
I also note that the per the Town Charter that “the term “shall” is to be construed as being mandatory” ( Sec. 1-2. – Definitions and rules of construction.)
So as this non-lawyer (and a few lawyers I have spoken with) sees it, as RTM Moderator you are mandated by the Town Charter to place onto the agenda of the next meeting the matter that was requested by more than 20 electors on a duly certified petition.
I trust you will do the right thing and place it on the RTM Agenda when it comes out on Monday August 21st.