The Charter Review Committee at Wednesday’s public forum recommended that the public think of any suggested revisions in terms of their future impact, not by judging in terms of opinions on current public servants.

Town Clerk Connor Degan, the CRC chair, explained that a charter review is conducted every decade to “ensure the document is able to continue thriving with the community it serves.”

The CRC has been reviewing the current charter since December. As part of that process, Degan said, town staff and committees gave feedback. It then met with individuals and boards to discuss potential impacts.

A community survey was released in May to solicit public input. These steps helped formulate the topics for discussion at the forum.

The CRC will present its initial report at Special Town Meeting on Oct. 26. There will  be no vote until Annual Town Meeting in May.

“By the way, we’re not doing anything,” stressed vice chair Peter Mimmo. “The town is going to decide the structure and the scope of its government, not us.”

Paths forward explained

There are two ways by which the town can seek charter approval. The first, which Degan described as “archaic,” is a Chapter 43B Section 10 process under state law. It would require a two-thirds approval vote at the ATM. The document then would go to the Attorney General’s Office for review. Finally, a simple majority would be needed to ratify it. But that could not occur until the May 2028 town election, Degan stressed.

The second way is by special act. Degan said this has been used several times in between charter reviews to modify language. Town counsel recently recommended using the special act approach.

A simple majority vote would be needed at the ATM for passage. The document would be reviewed by counsel from both houses. A ballot vote is not required in this instance.

Board of Health structure debated

One key topic was the proposed expansion of the Board of Health’s membership from three to five.

BOH chair Nasiba Mannan and member Mary Jo Ondrechen opposed the idea.

The chair noted that the board is “very active” and is the only body in town, other than the Select Board, that “can make and implement laws town-wide.”

While the board previously discussed adding members as part of its strategic plan, she noted that it was proposed during the pandemic.

Ken Weismantel spoke as a resident. Having served on several three-member boards, he said it is easier to violate Open Meeting Law if a quorum is only two people.

“My perspective is that we have to look at the big picture, not the small picture,” said CRC member Patrick O’Brien.

While this board is effective, three members may not be practical “down the road.”

Degan said 70% of survey respondents were interested in considering a member increase.

Planning Board chair Matthew Wronka, speaking as a private citizen, challenged  Degan about the efficacy of the survey. If it only allowed yes or no responses, there was no way to gauge how strong public interest is, he said.

Affirmation of new hires generates debate

Mimmo explained two conflicting trains of thought regarding the Select Board’s approval of all town hires. Having the Select Board only approve department heads would streamline the process, which historically has been a “rubber stamp.” The other view was that the Select Board currently has a gatekeeper function.

He noted that in some cases, waiting for Select Board endorsement has prevented people from starting sooner or has led them to accept other job offers.

Select Board chair Shahidul Mannan, speaking as a resident, was against this proposal. He asked if any data had been collected to support it.

The Human Resources Department did not compile relevant statistics, Degan said. But he added that the Select Board influences the process when the job is posted.

CPC elected at-large member proposed

Member Jamie Wronka explained that the CRC has considered recommending that one of the at-large members of the Community Preservation Committee be elected rather than appointed by the town manager.

Under the current nine-member committee structure, three members are appointed as liaisons by their respective boards. Three are appointed by the Select Board to represent the Historical Commission, the Open Space Preservation Commission and the Conservation Commission. There are three at-large members appointed by the Select Board.

An elected at-large position could encourage new participation and generate interest in the CPC. This person would be accountable to the voters.

Weismantel, the CPC chair, said was adamantly opposed to the idea.

Jamie Wronka pointed out that “folks who are well known to the Select Board” tend to be appointed “despite other people applying who have qualifications.”

“You’re trying to solve a problem that really hasn’t been identified,” countered Weismantel.

Town planner title change recommended

Mimmo, a Planning Board member, noted that the town charter currently includes a town planner. This position basically has been defunct for a decade.

Matthew Wronka gave a detailed history of the position at Monday’s meeting. The board recommended that the town manager appoint senior staff with feedback from the board.

Mimmo said the revised charter would codify the Planning Board’s positions presented on Monday.

Changes to recall provisions proposed

Degan explained the potential charter changes regarding the recall process for elected officials. Low attendance and ethics violations were pointed out as obvious reasons for a person’s removal.

Currently, the first step in the process is generating a recall statement. At least 10% of voters, with a minimum of 200 from each precinct, must support the recall statement.

Degan said this is a difficult step because the number of precincts has increased to five with population growth.

Once the statement is verified, a petition can be started for a recall election. Signatures from at least 20% of voters must be received by the town clerk within 45 days.

The major discussion point was defining concrete reasons for a recall election in the charter. Decreasing the threshold for the recall statement drew mixed responses..

“I would really like the public to weigh in about what the grounds should be, if we’re going to be definitive,” said CRC member Muriel Kramer.

Minor changes introduced

Several smaller, less controversial changes were explained. They included recommendations to:

• change the name of the Appropriation Committee to the Finance Committee;
• remove the Hopkinton Housing Authority section from the charter;
• change the town clerk from an elected position to an appointment;
• create a new charter article for the Department of Public Works;
• change the Cemetery Commission’s structure from an elected body to an appointed one to resolve quorum issues.