Procedural questions abound at Annual Town Meeting
- 5 hours ago
- 6 min read
Much to this reporter’s dismay, Stafford’s Annual Town Meeting on April 28, 2026, was not live streamed. It turned out to be a case study in civil participation and meeting procedure that the larger audience at home could have benefited from watching. More on that later…
This is where I tell you that I did record parts of the meeting. My camera work leaves something to be desired, and might make you all seasick, so I’ll spare you most of it, though some of it is worth sharing. However, there were a few people in the audience who objected to it being recorded so, for the record:
In general, there is no expectation of privacy in public which is why there are cameras all over town, up and down the highways, at your neighbor’s front door recording everything that happens in its view (and sometimes being sold to third parties, unless consumers get loud about it), and in virtually every public building in existence. (There are entire YouTube accounts devoted to testing the limits of the right to film in public and it turns out, there aren’t many.)
Any citizen is allowed to record any public meeting, as long as they are reasonably unobtrusive. (Feel free to geek out and get into statute here if you’d like.)
For this particular Town Meeting, which was better attended than most, John Whetton, Director of Public Works was nominated as the moderator. If you didn’t already know, Town Meetings are where residents get to vote directly on issues (remember this for later). While every item on the agenda ultimately passed, let’s go through some of the topics that generated conversation.
The 2026-2027 budget
The first item on the agenda reads as follows: “To approve the Town of Stafford budget in the amount of $48,797,716 as approved and recommended by the Board of Finance for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.” This item, however, was removed at the last Board of Selectmen meeting and sent to the voters at referendum. This is how it’s been done for years—even though it’s entirely possible to vote on a budget at a Town Meeting—but that spurred some discussion. (Incidentally, I did a quick news search to see if I could find articles about towns passing their budgets at Town Meeting, and learned that Hingham, Massachusetts really does Town Meetings right, complete with period costumes. It’s worth a look.)
Brian Bagley attempted to make a motion to add an item to the agenda to vote on automatically sending the budget to referendum every year. This brought up a number of questions. Chief among them was whether or not it was even possible to add an item to the agenda.
There are laws governing how towns are required to notify citizens about Town Meetings. This gives them the opportunity to see what the issues are and decide whether or not to come and vote on the issue. Bagley argues that #11— which read ”To do any other business proper to come before said meeting”—on the agenda gave him the opportunity to add his action item to the agenda. The procedural question then became whether or not this was “proper.”
Whetton called it “an issue of fairness.” Bagley argued that the Town had not operated that way for 30 years. “Wouldn’t you prefer it ran that way?’ Whetton then asked. The meeting moved on but the issue was raised again once the meeting made its way to #11 on the agenda.
Nancy Ravetto argued that the agenda has to be published in the paper, and if an item is not on the agenda then it is not proper to come before the meeting. Whetton asked Bagley to rescind or table his motion so that the Town had time to look into the proper procedure. He noted, “If we make an illegal motion and that illegal motion passes,it doesn’t do anybody any good within this town.”
Eventually, Karen Troiano, Stafford’s long-time Town Clerk (who is about to officially celebrate her last day in the office), suggested an ordinance might be a better way to approach this issue. However, it seems that may not be possible either.
According to CGS Section 7-388: “Any municipality complying with the provisions of this chapter shall, at its annual meeting or at a special meeting thereof warned and held for such purpose, fix the date of a special meeting to be held prior to the beginning of the next ensuing fiscal year for the purpose of acting upon its budget, which meeting shall be designated as the annual budget meeting of such municipality.”
Town ordinances do not override state law, which could mean the only way to send the budget directly to referendum would be to have a town charter. So, stay tuned to see how this plays out.
What the State of Connecticut has to say about Town Meetings
Stafford Free Press added emphasis to the parts most applicable to this discussion because it is dense reading. If you really want to know more about the statute, you can read the rest here:
Sec. 7-3. Warning of town and other meetings. The warning of each town meeting, and of each meeting of a city, borough, school district or other public community or of an ecclesiastical society, shall specify the objects for which such meeting is to be held. Notice of a town meeting shall be given by posting, upon a signpost or other exterior place near the office of the town clerk of such town and at such other place or places as may be designated as hereinafter provided, a printed or written warning signed by the selectmen, or a majority of them, and by publishing a like warning in a newspaper published in such town or having a circulation therein, such posting and such publication to be at least five days previous to holding the meeting, including the day that notice is given and any Sunday and any legal holiday which may intervene between such posting and such publication and the day of holding such meeting, but not including the day of holding such meeting; but any town may, at an annual meeting, designate any other place or places, in addition to the signpost or other exterior place, at which such warnings shall be set up.
Both warning and notice are requisite for legal meeting. 4 D. 62; 5 C. 391; 37 C. 392; 44 C. 157; 52 C. 483; 58 C. 488; 60 C. 165; 121 U.S. 121. Warning is to be affirmatively proved. 8 C. 247. Town clerk's record that meeting was legally warned is prima facie evidence thereof. 25 C. 555; see 121 U.S. 121. The hour of meeting presumed to be a proper hour. 13 C. 227. The notice should fairly state the purpose of meeting. Id.; 15 C. 327; 36 C. 83; 53 C. 577; 58 C. 488.
The Water Pollution Control Facility budget
The seventh item on the agenda concerned the Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF): “To approve the Water Pollution Control Facility budget in the amount of $2,404,091 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027.” This was motioned and seconded, then during discussion Bagley moved to table the motion.
He argued that residents who are not hooked up to the sewer should not have to pay for the facility, and as such he wanted any bond payments for the WPCF to be removed from the Town budget and into the WPCF budget. The WPCF’s annual budget is paid for via user fees, though some members of the audience took issue with that assertion from Whetton, who used to work for the WPCF.
Back in 2024, Stafford Free Press reported on a change in the bond payment schedule to the Town from the Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA), As you can probably guess, that means the WPCF reimburses the Town for bonds.
Marnie Hofmann seconded the motion and said she questioned why the WPCF was moving money to pay for UV lights, adding that it was a capital expenditure. Whetton, who is on the WPCA, said that the money was transferred from the WPCF’s Capital Improvement account, which is funded by user fees.
The move to table the item raised more questions about procedure, but a vote was eventually held on whether to table the motion. The voice vote was close enough that people were asked to vote again, this time by holding up pink cards handed out at the door. It failed. Consequently the original motion to approve the WPCF budget was back up for consideration, and it passed after just a voice vote.
The meeting will be reconvened after the budget referendum.
