Ward elections come to an end

'Everybody can't be a coach'
6/24/11
Thumbs up as Santa look-alike loses his locks
6/24/11
Charles Krauthammer: U.S. needs a new way to decide when we’re at war
6/24/11
Treasurer: ‘County finances can be rather complex’
6/24/11
> More opinion headlines

11:32 PM Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Middletown voters have said that they want a change at City Hall.

By voting to shrink the size of City Council and to do away with ward representation, voters on Tuesday, Nov. 3, said they have seen enough of the tomfoolery and inconsistency that has plagued council chambers during much of this decade.

Voters took the advice of Issue 26 advocates who said that a smaller council will be able to handle city business more adeptly and that at-large elections will likely produce a council made up of the town’s best minds.

With Tuesday’s outcome, City Council in 2013 will be converted from a seven-member body (one at-large mayor, two at-large council members and four ward representatives) to a group of five (one at-large mayor and four at-large council members).

Although this newspaper had recommended that voters retain ward representation, we have acknowledged in the past that the seven-member council — created by a similar charter amendment in 1990 — was unwieldy at times. A five-member council, we hope, will be able to expedite important issues and not be prone to factional disputes, as we’ve seen with recent councils.

When it takes effect in 2013, the Issue 26 charter amendment will end Middletown’s 20-year experiment with ward representation, which had largely been championed by the city’s 2nd Ward. That ward had sought the 1990 change in order to ensure representation at the council table but, in recent years, that representation has been uneven at best.

Action to reshape City Council was likely inevitable after some of the embarrassing rows in 2003 and 2006 involving former council member Laura Williams, lame-duck council member (and former mayor) David Schiavone, and other members of City Council. The tension and ill will among council members made for “must-see” TV on Tuesday nights, but also distracted the city’s leadership at a time when the city’s fortunes were declining.

Formal reviews of the city’s charter are only required every 10 years, so this year’s charter review commission was the first to have a crack at the question since a 2005 council-appointed study committee recommended shrinking council to a mayor and four ward representatives. (City Council in 2005 refused to place that question on the ballot, but did allow voters to amend the charter so that the mayor is now directly elected.)

While much attention has been focused on the size of council, Issue 26 was also about seating the best possible council members, and putting the city’s best and brightest to work on Middletown’s urgent challenges. Voters obviously felt that wards limited their choices and — at this critical time for the city — the need for a stronger council outweighs the need for ward representation.

When the time arrives, it’s imperative that the at-large council not forget the concerns of Issue 26 opponents — that council could again be dominated by East End residents — and pay attention to all sections of Middletown.

We think it’s clear that a general consensus that the current council is too large, too inefficient and too inconsistent has existed for several years. While we remain concerned that segments of the community may feel disenfranchised by the elimination of ward representation in four years, we believe that the streamlined council format may eliminate some of the conflicts and distractions — and get Middletown moving again in the right direction. In the meantime, it’s imperative that the council members who serve until the charter change takes effect strive to work together and lay the foundation for Middletown’s future success.

Share this article