Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mitigation Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Putney Selectboard pauses new 'mitigation rates' ordinance after public objections, petition circulated
Summary
Residents criticized a newly adopted ordinance to bill for Fire & EMS responses as rushed and lacking legal footing; the Selectboard voted to rescind and warn reconsideration on the next agenda while petitioners pursue a special town meeting.
The Putney Selectboard voted to pause and schedule reconsideration of a newly adopted ordinance that would allow the town to charge mitigation rates for deployments by the Putney Fire & EMS Department following an extended public hearing and strong public opposition.
At the July 9 hearing multiple residents said the draft ordinance reads like a rate schedule provided by a private billing company and lacks required procedural elements such as definitions, enforcement and appeal language. Jeanette White told the board: "This really is not an ordinance at all. It was rushed, did not have adequate public input, is not well written and should not be put into effect." Howard Fairman and others raised concerns that the draft may lack statutory authority and circulated a petition seeking a special town meeting to disapprove the ordinance.
Board members debated how to proceed. Peg Alden initially moved that two Selectboard members review the ordinance with the town lawyer; that motion was retracted and Alden moved — with Rebecca "Bex" Slattery seconding — that the new ordinance be rescinded and warned for discussion on the next meeting agenda. The motion passed, and Aileen Tulloch told the board a future ordinance should come with a public hearing before adoption.
Residents' objections focused on three recurring points: the ordinance does not specify who will decide when to bill or who is responsible for enforcement; it appears to rely on a separate "rate policy" that has not been published for public review; and the timing of an effective date may conflict with state statutory notice periods, according to public commenters. The public filing from Howard Fairman circulated examples of town fire department costs and argued the ordinance would shift general-tax supported services into individual debt obligations for recipients of emergency services.
The Selectboard took no final step to implement billing and instead placed rescission and further ordinance review on its next agenda. Petitioners are invoking state permissive referendum provisions and have asked the Selectboard to call a special town meeting within 60 days if the petition obtains required signatures.
