Council tables proposal to require advance notice for large Financial Town Meeting floor motions after hours of debate

The Scituate Town Council on Monday tabled a proposed resolution that would ask the Rhode Island General Assembly to require advance notice for sizable budget motions at the town’s annual Financial Town Meeting.

Bond counsel David Par, who drafted the resolution, told the council the measure would require any motion changing the recommended budget or appropriation by $10,000 or more to be filed with the town clerk 20 days before the meeting and posted with the warrant. "The purpose is to give the public notice of any larger expenditures so people can make an informed decision whether they want to attend the Financial Town Meeting," Par said.

Supporters said the notice requirement would prevent last‑minute motions that could alter the budget without broad public awareness. "It makes the FTM more transparent," Par said, urging that a fixed notice period allow the finance director and members of the public to analyze impacts in advance.

Opponents — including several longtime residents and one council member — said the proposal would restrict the traditional authority of the Financial Town Meeting, where voters may make motions from the floor. One critic argued the change effectively shifts important decisions from a small but legitimate town forum to a narrower process and called for the measure to require broader voter approval than the FTM itself can provide.

Several speakers raised practical concerns about the proposal’s timing: the town’s budget mailing schedule, state posting requirements, and the short interval between the council’s approval of the recommended budget and the FTM in some years. Multiple residents told the council that, in practice, school and department budgets are often finalized close to the town’s deadline and that a strict 20‑day filing rule could be unworkable without other schedule changes.

After multiple amendments and a lengthy public comment period, a motion to amend the draft to require 15 days of notice was seconded but the council ultimately agreed to table the resolution for further study and revision so staff can work out timing, mailing and charter issues.

The council did not vote on the underlying policy; the tabling motion passed. Council members asked bond counsel and staff to return with a revised draft that addresses concerns raised by residents and clarifies whether any change should require different voter approval or statutory language.

What happens next: The resolution will be revised and returned to a future council meeting for further discussion; any change that requires state action would then have to be submitted to the General Assembly.