Newport City Council finalizes charter edits, votes to place revised charter and ballot articles on March ballot

Newport City Council on Jan. 28 completed a marathon review of a proposed municipal charter and voted unanimously to submit the revised charter and related ballot articles to voters at the March 3, 2026 annual meeting.

The council met in a special session to work through a redline draft. Councilors said they aimed to resolve public comments and council edits in a single final version to be warned to the electorate. After an extended line‑by‑line review and multiple wording fixes, the council approved the edited document and separately approved the packet of ballot articles that will accompany it.

Major substantive changes adopted during the meeting include: writing a 3 percent petition threshold for calling special city meetings (expressed in words and figures); a 15 percent threshold for recall petitions; clarifying that a mayoral veto must be provided in writing “no later than 7 calendar days after passage” and that an override by the alderpersons (three or more) must be an agenda item at the next regular city council meeting; and adjusting language to consistently use “city council,” “city manager,” and “alderpersons” where the draft intended to distinguish between the mayor and the other four members.

On executive‑administrative relationships, the charter retained language that the city manager need not be a Newport resident either before or after appointment but rejected adding a separate, strict requirement that the manager maintain a specific private‑residence presence in the city; the council said manager presence and performance will be governed by the manager’s job responsibilities and evaluation procedures. The council also specified that the city clerk and city treasurer will be appointed by the council with advice from the city manager, will serve under the council’s supervision, and may be removed only for cause with notice and a hearing if requested.

Councilors debated whether to keep a detailed local section on deficit spending and borrowing (former §805) or to rely on Vermont statutes for those rules; after discussion about transparency and state law options for addressing deficits, the council agreed to delete the local §805 and rely on state statute while preserving the charter’s provision that budgets remain a matter for voter approval.

Legal counsel Dave Ryu and staff were present during the review. Clerk‑Treasurer Jim Johnson provided current voter‑checklist counts to show how percentages would translate to signatures; the council used that data in opting for the 3 percent threshold, which the clerk estimated at roughly 115 signatures under current rolls.

After accepting Carrie Schultz’s tracked edits and producing a clean (all‑underlined) copy for the warning packet, the council moved and seconded the motion to approve the redline version for submission to voters. The motion passed with all members voting aye. The council later voted to approve, as amended, the 2026 annual‑meeting warning that contains the charter proposal and other ballot items.

Public comment at the end of the meeting included residents urging more time for review and voicing concerns about expanding the city manager’s powers and about rising municipal budgets. Councilors said the charter and the ballot are now in voters’ hands and that the March 3 vote will decide whether the revisions take effect.

The council adjourned and set its next regular meeting for Feb. 2 at 6 p.m.