RUMFORD — Selectmen on Tuesday night unanimously approved placing a proposed ordinance before voters in June that would initially cap municipal spending at $6.2 million.

That includes initiated article requests and all components of the municipal budget, excluding state, county and school assessments.

The spending cap ordinance is the latest morph from the original tax-cap petition ordinance submitted April 4 to the board following a Concerned Rumford Taxpayers Group meeting.

The petition sought to create an ordinance to cap the property tax rate at $17.50 per $1,000 of assessed valuation for each fiscal year, beginning July 1. The current tax rate is $24.25.

The petition also wanted a special town meeting called, deeming that a critical circumstance exists with a possible shutdown of the Rumford paper mill.

At a special board meeting on April 9, selectmen unanimously rejected calling a special town meeting. By a 4-0 vote, they decided the petition did not merit the  “critical circumstance” required under town law.

Additionally, town attorney Jennifer Kreckel, in her letter to selectmen dated April 9, deemed the “tax cap” ordinance illegal.

At Tuesday night’s public hearing on ordinance proposals, former Selectman Mark Belanger reintroduced the tax relief petition as a spending cap ordinance.

In his overview, Belanger said the cap’s revenue from taxes equals an $18.50 tax rate.

He said the new amount is based on the numbers received last week on the fixed town cost.

“We felt that $17.50 (tax) rate revenue was too aggressive,” he said. “This $6.2 million municipal budget number will still give the Rumford taxpayers a 19 percent break on their taxes while also reaching our goal of a $1 million reduction in the Rumford mill’s taxes.”

He said all property and business owners will benefit from the spending cap.

“Let’s say you have a $100,000 home, you will save about $570 per year on your tax bill,” Belanger said.

The ordinance also allows for an annual increase of 2 percent with voter approval and has override provisions, should the town have an emergency.

He said the spending cap would give all Rumford business and property owners a tax reduction, decrease the paper mill’s tax bill by $1 million, depending on their valuation, create incentive for businesses to move to Rumford and nudge town officials to find more efficient ways of managing departments.

“For some reason, Rumford is spending two to three times more for town government and departments per capita than any other town in Maine,” Belanger said. “This would bring us to a more sustainable level of spending now and into the future.”

He read the ordinance and later tweaked it by including initiated articles in the $6.2 million cap.

Selectman Jeff Sterling sought clarification on the 2 percent clause.

Belanger said the spending cap can increase by only 2 percent annually.

Sterling asked Belanger to quantify his per capita statement, but Belanger said he didn’t have that information with him.

When board Chairman Greg Buccina sought comment from the audience, police Chief Stacy Carter asked the board not to approve it for the June ballot.

Carter said it conflicts with the town charter, which already allows residents to vote down the budget. He said the proposed ordinance would create a hardship for selectmen and department heads.

Carter said he hasn’t heard a strong outcry from the public that the services provided by the town are not wanted. With fixed costs and labor contracts, he said the ordinance would “force the board to cut the other departments’ budgets in half.”

Additionally, Carter said it could potentially also reduce his department to having only one officer to patrol the town, creating a safety hazard should that officer be tied up with handling a domestic violence complaint or drunken-driving arrest.

Referring to a recent regionalization of services meeting with Mexico, Carter said Mexico Town Manager John Madigan said that when the mill rate is reduced, it also reduces the state revenue sharing.

Following more discussion, Buccina said that if the spending cap ordinance is legal, the board would give it a chance on the ballot.

Belanger called Tuesday night’s board decision “a watershed moment” for something that could affect the whole town.

“Our core services could be impacted seriously with this proposal,” Buccina said.

However, Sterling motioned to accept it as written and put it on the ballot. It was seconded.

Buccina said the town attorney must review it and the vote is subject to legal approval.

The board voted 3-0 to put it before voters in June.

[email protected]