Sometimes it’s in the fine print. Well, when it comes to elections, that may mean something other than a list of candidates or even statewide referenda. There are some important gems hidden (or really listed) among the local questions on the ballots in many communities.
A look at some Newport and Washington County sample ballots reveals that cities and towns are looking to eliminate some elected positions and make them appointed; remove the requirement that ordinances be published in newspapers; and change non-partisan elections to partisan, where candidates would run under a party label; and more of course.
It seems that many communities have gone through some form of charter review, resulting in as many as 18 charter questions on one local ballot (Westerly), and none in other communities. It’s interesting that perhaps the most controversial of the statewide ballot questions is whether the state should have another constitutional convention. A charter, we would think, is a community’s constitution.
The state is required to propose holding a constitutional convention every ten years. If approved, delegates would be elected next year and the convention would convene in 2026.
But rather than focus on what is becoming a controversial issue, whether to hold or not hold a constitutional convention, let’s look at some of the local questions. It’s in those questions that long-held norms may be challenged without much notice.
In Charlestown, for instance, voters are being asked to remove a requirement that ordinances be published in newspapers with distribution within the town.
For years, nationally and statewide, the question has been raised about requirements to publish legal notices in print publications. For many newspapers it has been a cash cow, revenue, if lost, would do considerable harm to a newspaper’s bottom line.
In Charlestown the provision is over ordinances, but if approved could easily be the opening that leads to a more active approach to no longer require legal advertisements appear in newspapers. The alternatives, of course, are online publications likes WhatsUpNewp, social media sites, radio, television or whatever the imagination holds.
In the past, organizations like the American Newspaper Publishers Association, would be railing against such a provision. But Charlestown is a small community, the proposed charter change tucked in among 11 proposed charter changes.
There are also bond referenda in a few communities, and we suspect statewide. In Richmond, Charlestown and Hopkinton voters will be asked to approve a $15 million school bond for the Chariho Regional School District; in Newport, a $98.5 million infrastructure bond; in Westerly, an $18 million infrastructure bond that would focus on road and sidewalk construction.
Here’s a look at some of the more interesting charter revisions proposed in a number of cities and towns:
- In Hopkinton, a rural community, they are asking that town residents be called just that, instead of inhabitants.
- They are also suggesting a residency requirement of six months plus a day to be able to run for local office. That would eliminate a requirement that candidates be subjected to a background check.
- Currently, Hopkinton voters elect their town clerk, director of public welfare, town moderator, and town sergeant. In November, candidates in each of those positions are running unopposed. Under charter revisions, each of those positions would no longer be elected, but appointed by the Town Council.
- In Jamestown, voters are being asked to approve a charter revision that would allow the town to publish only a “digest or description” of proposed ordinances or amendments in a newspaper of general circulation, rather than the entire ordinance or amendment. This too could have significant impact on a newspaper’s revenue.
- Among other charter changes the council would be allowed to fill vacancies on the school board and council. Currently, the charter apparently requires the council to select the next highest vote getter. This would have no such restriction.
- The only local charter amendment in Tiverton would require the school department to submit monthly financial reports to the Town Administrator and Town Council.
- In Middletown, charter provisions would change the way town councilors and school committee members are elected from non-partisan, as they are now, to partisan. In both cases, the charter revisions would remove the provision that members of the council or school committee be “elected without political party designation.”
- In Charlestown, besides the provision relative to publication of ordinances, voters are being asked to change the terms for both the council and planning commission (which is also elected) from two to four years, with staggered terms.
- Another provision would require the town to provide emergency medical services, either by creating a town department or contracting with a third party.
- In Westerly, there are 18 charter revisions on the ballot.
- A huge issue in Westerly has been shoreline access. Voters are being asked to prohibit the town from “conveying or abandoning any of its interests in Rights of Way to the shoreline.”
- In contrast to Jamestown, where it appears the charter revision would eliminate the requirement to appoint the next highest vote getter to office in the event of a vacancy, the Westerly charter revisions would require filling vacancies with the next highest vote getter.
