The polls opened yesterday in Jamestown with early in-person voting and the fate of two local questions on the ballot.
The architects behind those referendums, however, are worried voters might not remember the details of those questions because of the amount of time that has passed since they were debated.
The first question asks voters whether they should approve a $1.5 million bond to renovate and repair the library; the second question concerns amendments to the charter that would change the way petitioned ordinances are governed.
Gene Mihaly, chairman of the library board of trustees, said there is no direct local tax to residents for the bond proposal.
According to Mihaly, the entire debt service from the bond, including interest and principal, will be paid annually by the state Office of Library & Information Services. The trustees are hoping for $1.5 million from the agency. If the grant is less than that, Mihaly said, only that lower amount will be authorized through the bond.
Taxpayers, aside from the borrowed money counting against the municipal debt ceiling, will not be burdened. “In essence, we’re going to be getting an enormous amount of help at zero cost,” Mihaly said.
If the bond is approved, Mihaly said the $1.5 million will be used the subsidize the $3.85 million plan to expand the North Road library. There is nearly $2 million already secured for the project, including $1 million from a bond passed in 2018, $400,000 from The Champlin Foundation, $430,000 from private donors and $150,000 in a capital account. There also are two pending $450,000 grant applications being considered, he said.
If the bond and both grants are approved, the total would surpass the $3.85 million estimate. Mihaly, however, said he is seeking additional money to mitigate rising construction costs and contingencies.
“If we are blessed to get that, we might need it,” he said. “The cost estimate is only good if somebody bids on it.”
The plan, along with replacing the roof and upgrading the mechanical systems, would move the areas for children and teenagers, respectively, to the north and south sides of the building along the western most wall parallel with North Road.
Both of these areas would be expanded with 562-foot alcoves. A quiet reading room for adults and space for the local history collection would be moved to the current children’s room directly south of the main vestibule. A walkway for deliveries, covered by a pergola, would wrap around the main auditorium from the parking lot to the former museum.
The second question would alter the charter provision that allows qualified electors to propose ordinances. The current language led to lawsuits when a grassroots organization filed a petition to create a law that would protect illegal immigrants from “unwarranted fear, discrimination and deportation.”
According to the proposed amendment, a petition must be established by five qualified electors. After these representatives register with the town clerk, a “true copy of the final proposed ordinance” must be filed with that office. The clerk then would have 30 days to review the proposal and develop blank sheets for signatures.
Once the forms are ready for circulation, supporters of the petition would have 120 days to collect signatures from 12 percent of the electorate. That would be up from 10 percent, which means about 100 more signatures based on the town’s current population. Currently, there is no deadline for collecting signatures.
After the signatures are collected, the circulator of each form must file a notarized affidavit swearing to the validity of them. Also, the circulator must give everyone the opportunity to read the full text of the proposal before a signature is solicited. This is not clear under the current format.
If the town clerk deems enough signatures valid to reach the 12 percent threshhold, the town council would have 60 days to consider the proposed ordinance, which would be double the current time. If the council fails to adopt the ordinance in that time frame, the petition committee has 30 days to submit a notarized request for a referendum. This must be unanimous by all five petitioning members. If the petitioners want to withdraw the petition, however, only four signatures are needed “at any time prior to the 50th day preceding the day scheduled for a vote.”
A charter review committee, led by Councilman Randy White, met 10 times spanning four months to develop those changes. The recommendations were made to the council in July 2019.
“It was apparent from the start, that while these sections guaranteed Jamestown residents the right to propose ordinances by initiative petition, they gave very little guidance,” committee member Jim Rugh said. “As a result, town officials have been forced to interpret these sections.”