Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Petition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget committee to review citizen petition section-by-section after debate over ballot timing
Summary
Budget committee members agreed to a section-by-section review of a citizen petition (signed by 276 residents) after petitioners insisted the measure appear on the ballot as written; members raised legal, practical, and tax-impact questions and will request the municipal attorneys opinion be attached to the packet.
Members of the Belgrade Budget Committee began an extended review of a citizen petition that seeks changes to town financial governance and transparency.
The petitioner (Resident, S6) told the committee the petition had 276 signatures and "the petition is now a valid document ... it has to be on the ballot as written or not on ballot." Committee members acknowledged the signers but raised legal and practical concerns about specific sections and possible unintended consequences. Committee member (S1) said he had "serious reservations with placing to the voters something that the municipal lawyer ... would not recommend."
Discussion focused on three tracks: (1) whether parts of the petition could be integrated into town policy without placing everything to voters; (2) whether the petition language is sufficiently clear for voters; and (3) how and when tax and rent impacts can be estimated for voters. Committee member (S2) proposed a systematic, section-by-section review at the next meeting so members could identify which sections had broad agreement and which required more analysis: "we could make a decision as a group at the next meeting to go section by section, discuss how we understand it."
Committee members also noted a severability clause in the petition that, in the petitioners attorneys view, would allow problematic sections to be removed without invalidating the entire measure. The municipal attorneys opinion will be attached to the meeting packet for the committee and the public to review. Members asked staff to post the petition language and summary in local channels and to circulate the lawyer's letter ahead of the next meeting.
The committee scheduled a follow-up meeting (Monday the 27th at 6:00 p.m.) to undertake the section-by-section review and to prepare materials in advance for committee members and for public notice. The committee's next packet will include the petition text, the attorney's memo, and any one-page summaries to aid discussion.
