Budget committee votes to ‘not recommend’ petition to add $5,000 for Libby/Living Museum

The budget committee voted to "not recommend" a petition warrant article that would add $5,000 to the town's living museum capital reserve fund, after members and counsel raised legal and drafting concerns.

Jim (staff member) opened discussion by reading the petition language and noting the select board had earlier not recommended the article. "The select board did vote to approve the operating budget as you recommended by a vote of 5 to 0," he said while introducing the separate petition article. Committee members focused on two legal issues: whether the article attempts to change trustee appointment or transfer powers and whether it combines multiple disparate purposes into a single warrant article.

Petitioner Suzanne Ryan, one of the article sponsors, acknowledged the article has "problems with the language" but said petitioners expect to propose floor amendments at the deliberative session to address counsel's concerns. "There's a discussion about what it is we're trying to save and it's not necessarily the building," Ryan said, adding the intent is to "save a museum that's an asset to the town."

A town attorney and other participants explained the charitable trust/probate court typically controls successor trustees and that some proposed authority in the article could be improper. One committee member summarized the practical constraint: a successor trustee would need a building, museum expertise and a substantial endowment. As warned in the discussion, "they would have to have a 1 to $2,000,000 endowment to support the museum." (attributed to the staff member speaking to charitable‑trust guidance.)

After discussion and questions about whether amendments could be made at the deliberative session, a motion was made to "not recommend" the article and was seconded. The committee carried the motion in a roll‑call style vote. Committee members noted the committee's "not recommend" will appear in the voter information packet and might influence turnout and opinion, even as petitioners plan to seek amendments on the floor.

The committee recorded the recommendation and returned to the remainder of the budget agenda; the article remains eligible for deliberative‑session amendments and a final vote by town meeting voters.