Two citizen home‑rule petitions for initiative and referendum defeated by Westborough Town Meeting

Town meeting considered two citizen-sponsored home-rule petitions intended to create local initiative and referendum procedures but voters defeated both.

Article 15 (local initiative) would have authorized a process, modeled in part on state practice, allowing citizens to place binding ballot questions before the full electorate after collecting 200 signatures (with precinct distribution requirements). Proponents said the measure would broaden participation beyond those who can attend town meeting; opponents, including the Select Board and Finance Committee, said the town already has mechanisms for citizen petitions and warned about limited guardrails, potential frequent special elections, legal exposure and costs. The finance committee recommended defeat 7–1; the Select Board unanimously recommended defeat. The motion to petition the legislature for the special act was defeated 21–128.

Article 16 (referendum) would have allowed a referendum procedure to overturn a town-meeting vote if 200 registered voters petitioned within seven business days; the motion was defeated 17–115. Opponents argued the initiative and referendum processes would undermine the deliberative nature of open town meeting, create risk of repeated and time-sensitive reversals of actions (for example, delaying grants or contracts), and invite litigation if legal sufficiency and subject-matter limits were unclear.

Why it matters: the proposals would have created new pathways for direct democracy in a community that uses open town meeting, and the defeat preserves the current balance between town meeting deliberation and petition mechanisms.

What’s next: proponents may seek revised language or more guardrails; town officials recommended addressing participation gaps through other measures (e.g., remote access or scheduling changes) rather than establishing a ballot-based override mechanism.