The Simsbury Charter Revision Commission debated whether to enshrine an Open Space Committee’s stewardship role in the town charter or to leave detailed definitions and duties to the town code, after resident Susan Messino urged clearer language and protections during the public-audience portion of the commission’s Oct. 9 meeting.

Messino, who identified herself as “Susan Messino, 41 Madison Lane,” told the commission that the committee’s recommended use of the word “stewardship” was intended to be nonpolitical and practical. “I want to first preface it that this is not spending money or anything like that,” she said, adding that the committee’s stewardship work has focused on reducing mowing, timing maintenance to save money, and using low-red-tape contracts for farmers to manage certain parcels.

The commission’s discussion focused on two connected questions: what “open space” means in Simsbury, and whether the charter is the right place to define stewardship and related categories of land. Commissioners noted the town already has multiple categories of open land — including parcels deeded to the town, land purchased and protected by the town, state-owned parks and properties, and land owned by nonprofits such as the Simsbury Land Trust — and said those categories complicate a one-line charter definition.

Commission members said the charter should preserve the Open Space Committee’s advisory role while recommending that the Board of Selectmen adopt a code-level, more detailed definition of stewardship and the different categories of open space. One commissioner summarized the commission’s emerging view: if the committee is already exercising stewardship responsibilities under a Board of Selectmen motion from June 2019, that delegation should be reflected in town code so definitions can be amended more easily than a charter change.

Commissioners and Messino discussed whether the Open Space Committee must be formally requested by the Board of Selectmen before providing advice. The commission concluded the proposed charter language that the committee “assist and advise the Board of Selectmen” read as permissive — the committee can respond proactively but its advisory role is formally tied to the Selectmen — and agreed to recommend that the Board of Selectmen consider adopting code language that clarifies when and how the committee may proactively prepare reports on parcels under consideration for acquisition or disposition.

The commission also touched on related charter items that affect public participation and committee procedures. Members agreed to a proposed red-line change to Section 6.01(d) to require appointed and elected boards and commissions to allow a public audience at regular meetings “unless prohibited by law,” and discussed the difficulty of mandating timing for public audiences (for example, during pending land-use hearings where legal limits apply).

Commissioners asked the Open Space Committee to provide sample definitions of stewardship and the seven categories of open land the committee uses, and the commission said it will include those materials as part of its formal recommendations to the Board of Selectmen so code edits can be considered alongside the commission’s charter proposals.

Formal actions at the meeting were limited and procedural. The commission approved the minutes of its Sept. 24, 2025 meeting by voice vote; no roll call or individual vote tallies were recorded in the transcript. The commission also amended the evening’s agenda to move the open-space discussion earlier so the public speaker could be heard.

The commission reported several next steps: packaging the Open Space Committee’s definitions and stewardship examples as an appendix to the commission’s report to the Board of Selectmen; keeping stewardship language in the recommendation but placing detailed definitions and operational rules in the town code; and continuing work on other charter sections at the commission’s Oct. 28 meeting, which the commission set aside to review finance- and budget-related charter language.

The commission’s discussion repeatedly emphasized process limits: members cautioned against placing detailed operational requirements (for example, line-item spending authority or specific mowing schedules) in the charter, noting those are better handled in code or by the Board of Selectmen. Messino urged commissioners to “put every single good-government thing in the charter” where appropriate — but acknowledged, and the commission reiterated, that detailed definitions and operational rules belong in code so they can be updated without a charter amendment.

The commission said it will recommend the Board of Selectmen consider amending the town code to (1) define the types or categories of open land used in Simsbury’s planning documents, (2) clarify the Open Space Committee’s stewardship duties as delegated by the Board of Selectmen in 2019, and (3) specify when the committee may proactively submit reports to the Selectmen concerning acquisition or disposition of town-owned parcels. The commission will attach the Open Space Committee’s materials to its formal report to the Board of Selectmen.

The meeting closed with administrative items and scheduling. The commission asked staff to return language options for the commission’s review and confirmed that technical or definitional issues about stewardship and public-audience rules will be addressed in code recommendations rather than via charter edits.