N. Smithfield official has second thoughts on charter question

NORTH SMITHFIELD – The Town Council may move to trim its proposed charter revision questions for the Nov. 6 election ballot next Monday night in light of what could be considered a confusing reworking of charter wording in Question 10 – a request to update the charter in light of previous questions creating substantive change.

Town Council President John Beauregard said on Tuesday that he read through Question 10 in its final form for the ballot and was wondering if it was too incongruous to put before the voters in the upcoming election.

Although the council cannot add to its ballot submission for the Nov. 6 ballot, Beauregard said the opportunity to remove an item from consideration still exists under the state’s ballot rules.

“This question is too long and has too much information in it,” Beauregard said. “No one is going to read all that in the ballot booth on Nov. 6” he added. “And no one is going to vote on something they don’t understand,” he added.

“So I am going to ask the council to pull that,” Beauregard said.

Beauregard was among the four councilors approving the question for the ballot during

the council’s recent consideration of the final ballot questions and as a result can ask for reconsideration of the decision. Councilman Thomas McGee IV, voted against adding the question while also describing it to be confusing, according to Beauregard.

As of early this week, Beauregard said he did not know what his peers would do regarding his request for reconsideration but voiced a hope that they would agree.

“It is a very reasonable group and so when they hear my reasoning I believe they will agree,” he said.

After questioning the wording while looking it over again, Beauregard said he also asked his wife Deborah to look it over and tell him what she thought. She too indicated the question contained too much information for a ballot question, he said.

Although he would like to see that question removed, Beauregard said other important charter change questions would remain on the ballot under his request, including Question 2 asking voters to consider adopting a council-appointed town administrator form of government and others granting the administrator a four-year-term were it to remain elected and returning the school committee to a five-member elected body and dropping the two appointed members added under a prior charter change.

“That all stays and this would just clean up a question that we tried to lump too much into,” Beauregard said of his proposal.

The Town Council held several meetings on charter changes recommended by the town’s Charter Review Commission and adopted 11 questions overall before sending them on to be put in ballot form by Town Solicitor David V. Igliozzi.

The first ballot question, not a charter item, pertains to the approval of $1 million in funding for improvement of a water line serving a Mechanic Street and Connector Road neighborhood. The bonding would result in an overall $518,000 charge to the Slatersville Water System under a 20-year bond allowing the extension of an 8-inch water main to address groundwater contamination in the neighborhood.

Question 2 seeks approval for a change making the current elected town administrator a council-appointed town employee, a major revision of the town’s existing form of government.

Question 3 also relates to the town administrator position but instead considers what its term of office would be if it continues to be an elected town official. The current term is for two-years but voters will consider making it a four-year term beginning on Dec. 1, 2020.

Question 4 asks voters to set a term limit on local elected positions such as town council members, the elected administrator, and elected school committee.

“Commencing on Decem- ber 1, 2020, shall Article II. Elections be amended to provide that all elected officials shall serve terms that shall not exceed eight (8) consecutive years?

Question 5 seeks a change in the make up of the school committee.

‘’Commencing on December 1, 2020, shall Article XIV School Department be amended to decrease the composition of the school committee from seven (7) members to five (5) members who shall be elected and removing the appointment of two members (one by the town council and one by the town administrator)?”

The change would reverse a prior charter revision approved by the voters that added the two appointed members to the school committee. The current five elected members serve staggered four year terms, and the appointed members two year terms concurrent with the town council and current town administrator’s post.

Question 6 asks voters to make changes in the process for recall, both in reasons for cause and an easing in the requirements that must be met to trigger such recall elections.

The current requirement for recall petitions to receive the signatures of 30 percent of the total number of registered voters for the past election. The change would lessen that requirement to just 30 percent of the voters participating in the election of the official facing recall.

Question 7 seeks to revise the limit on assuming town debit without a referendum. The change would be from the current fixed debit limit of $200,000 to one percent of the gross town budget overall.

Question 8 creates a new town Asset Management Commission and amends charter provisions related to other officers and commissions, and boards.

The Commission would be responsible for compiling an inventory of all land, buildings and vehicles owned by the town, assess the condition of all buildings and establish and prioritize the need for major repairs or renovations in addition to other requirements including preparing a list of town-owned property that could be sold or transferred.

Question 9 asks voters to add the position of Town Planner to the provisions of the charter.

The final question for the ballot, Question 11, addresses editing and terminology changes in the charter.

“Shall the Home Rule Charter of the Town of North Smithfield be amended: (a) to correct spelling, grammar and punctuation as needed; to provide for appropriate technical changes; to render language gender-neutral; (b) to incorporate editing and terminology changes that would bring continuity and clarity to the Town Charter; (c) to adopt the language modernization changes, format changes and section numbering changes as necessary to clarify the Town Charter as approved by the Town Council; and (d) to update text changes to be consistent with existing Rhode Island law and statutes?”