Ballot Ready: Local Charter Questions 5-13 in a Nutshell

CHARTER REVISION QUESTIONS 5-13 ON TUESDAY'S BALLOT

Below are the nine charter revision questions which will be on Tuesday’s #ballot and some points to consider. I hope everyone read Councilman Tom #McGee’s letter to the editor clarifying that charter proposals were placed on the ballot simply to allow residents the opportunity to vote on the changes. #Council members expressed different opinions on many of these changes.

QUESTION 5

Would change our form of government from an ELECTED Town #Administrator to an APPOINTED Town Administrator. • The Town Administrator would be appointed by a vote of the Town #Council. • Educational and related work experience requirements that appointees must have are cited; but those requirements become meaningless by another clause “...or any combination of education and experience that is substantially equivalent”. The proposed language creates a loophole for political cronies to be appointed. • The proposed language regarding the composition of the Screening Committee will not result in a balanced cross section of the community. • We need to do this right or not at all.

QUESTION 6

If question 5 is rejected and we continue to elect our Town Administrator, starting with the election of 2020, the term of office would be for 4 years instead of 2 years. • Two year terms hold the Administrator more accountable to the residents by allowing taxpayers to weigh in on his or her performance more frequently. • Two year terms hold the Administrator more accountable for tax increases and tax rates when he or she has to face voters every two years. • Over a four year term taxes could go significantly with little recourse for residents.

QUESTION 7

Commencing in 2020 elected officials would be prohibited from holding office for more than 8 consecutive years. • Term #limits for state and national offices make sense, but in small towns where it’s hard to even find more than 5 candidates to run for local office this could be problematic. We have had many uncontested elections due to a lack of candidates. If an incumbent does a lousy job you can simply vote for the new candidate.

QUESTION 8

Reverses the #charter change made in 2014. That change increased the composition of the School Committee from five to seven members; five members are elected, the sixth member appointed by the Town Administrator, and the seventh appointed by the Town Council. • I see pluses and minuses to this issue. I do resent the fact that this is being placed on the ballot again simply to allow those who voted against it in 2014 a second chance to get their way.

QUESTION 9

We currently have a #recall provision in the Charter but this change would modify the current language. It would lower the number of signatures needed to call for a recall election. • 30% of the number of voters who “participated” in the last election would need to sign a recall petition. Currently 30% of the town’s “registered” voters need to sign a recall provision. It basically lowers the number of signatures required from roughly 3,000 to roughly 1,000. • A lower number could result in recall elections every time you turn around at an expense of roughly $6,000. Although it lists suggested reasons for recall, the language allows anyone to start a recall petition for any reason at all. • We have elections every two years; that in itself is a recall provision. Elected officials can’t be recalled for the first six months of their terms. Do the math, by the time we hold the special recall election the individual’s term could nearly be over. • Bad idea which could lead to many nightmares.

QUESTION 10

This change increases the amount of money the Town can #borrow WITHOUT voter approval from $200,000 to 1% of the town’s gross budget which would be much higher than the fixed dollar amount. • State law restricts the amount a town’s tax #levy can increase to 4% or less. New bond payments are exempt from the levy cap. If this is approved the Town could return to the old practice of borrowing for capital purchases and increase our tax levy by more than 4%. • The town currently has MILLIONS (roughly six) in unrestricted accounts which is available if needed. Actually, all it takes to access that money is a vote by the Town Council. What we really needed was a change in the Charter restricting the Town Council from blowing that money without voter approval.

QUESTION 11

Establishes a nine member Asset Management Commission which would basically be charged to oversee physical assets of the Town (building and grounds, properties owned) and review capital requests and plans. • This Commission can be established at any time by an ordinance approved by the Town Council. There is absolutely no need to include it in the Charter. • We can’t even find volunteers to serve on 5 member town boards and this requires nine members.

QUESTION 12

Outlines the responsibilities and duties of the Town Planner in the Charter. • This simply codifies the position of the Town Planner in the Town Charter.

QUESTION 13

Described as “Editing and Terminology” it consists of four sub-sections which appear to address corrections thought to be needed. • I will not vote to approve any changes to the Charter which have not been clearly delineated. • The fourth sub-section concerns me greatly. It reads: “to update text changes to be consistent with existing Rhode Island Law and statutes.” Language in a town charter can set more stringent requirements than state law, but charter language cannot set lesser standards than established by state law. For instance, written legal opinions of the town solicitor are exempt by state law from “having to” be released to the public but a town charter may include language that allows the opinions to be available to the public. Another example would be the state law that establishes public bid procedures. The law sets minimum requirements outlining the bidding procedures to be followed but a town charter may include additional requirements. Concerned with exactly what was going to be changed in our town charter under this heading, I asked twice for a list of the proposed changes the Town Council reviewed but never received the list.

IF YOU AGREE WITH ANY OF THE POINTS I HAVE RAISED PLEASE CONSIDER SHARING MY POST WITH FACEBOOK FRIENDS AND FAMILY. #northsmithfield #towncouncil #towncharter #election #ballotquestions #taxlevy #debt #bonds #elected #official #officials #termlimits #townadministrator