RANGELEY — The Board of Selectmen on Monday, Feb. 16, deferred acting on a citizen’s petition to change the June 2025 town meeting from secret ballot to an open meeting format. The decision to defer action was due, in part, to allow the board time to allow for time to consult with legal entities.

The petition had a total of 86 valid signatures and was circulated by residents Chris Farmer, Christy White and Cynthia Egan.

During the annual town meeting in June 2016, townspeople voted 64-34 to change the voting method from open forum to secret ballot at the polls. The process went into effect for the 2017 town meeting.

Town Manager Joe Roach said, “Last week we received a petition about reverting back to open meeting session. I reached out for a legal opinion. Essentially, Article B20, which is a recurring article on the town meeting warrant, is really an advisory question.”

The legal opinion was provided by Stephen Langsdorf of PretiFlaherty.

Article B20 in the June 2024 Town Meeting Warrant read: Shall the Town vote on all warrant articles by Secret Ballot at the 2025 (Fiscal Year 2026) Town Meeting? The article passed with 181 in favor and 84 opposed.

“The decision to make the town meeting an open meeting or by secret ballot lies exclusively with the Board of Selectmen,” Roach said as he read from the legal opinion. “Accordingly, the petition should be rejected because it is not a proper item for town meeting. Petitioners have the opportunity to try to convince the board to handle these questions in a public meeting every year. The town meeting can’t decide whether it is going to be open or referendum. It is the board that makes that decision.”

Farmer, who is an attorney, said he appreciated the opinion from counsel.

“Our petition was presented to bring up an issue that has been long talked about since it has been switched,” he said. “By doing this by secret ballot, it is binary. It’s either yes, you approve the article or no, you don’t approve. By having it in open town format, that allows you to discuss, it allows you to look at what has been recommended by the board, it allows you to look at what has been recommended by the budget committee, it allows questions to be asked and then a vote determined at that meeting.”

Farmer pointed out in the past, during the open town meetings, discussion allowed for voters to change articles prior to deciding them.

“We feel from a democracy standpoint, this puts the power back in to the hands of the people,” he added.

Farmer acknowledged that significantly more people vote by secret ballot than show up at a traditional town meeting. However, the Town of Farmington, which has a much higher budget and greater population, still holds town meetings in open format, he added.

“People come and discuss things. To me, it is the purest form of natural government. I think we are denying ourselves the ability to do that but just going in a voting. I would ask that you allow it to go forward. If you think part of that [petition] is not technically correct, then redact it. The premise of the question was “Do you want town meeting in person?”. We got those signatures in 36 hours without even trying.”

Farmer then asked that a special town meeting to address anticipated police budget deficit be moved to April 15 and include an article to change the town meeting format. The meeting had been set for April 8.

Written ballot voting can take place during open format meetings, said Egan.

Board of Selectmen Chair James Jannace said, “By doing the secret ballot, we average 318 voters versus 79 in open format. According to legal, this petition for changing the town meeting format is a non-actionable petition.”

Farmer asked the board to at least include the issue clearly on the upcoming ballot.

“I heard the words ‘non-actionable’ mentioned. I didn’t see that in state law,” resident Ethna Thompson said. “I saw that denial to move a a petition forward could happen on the grounds that it violates state law, it is improperly worded or conflicts with other local regulations. That wasn’t even grounds to deny moving a ballot petition forward, it seemed like the board could work with legal counsel to make sure it presented appropriately. Am I hearing the intent is to not move the ballot petition forward based on it being a non-actionable item but not in violation of state law, not improperly worded and it doesn’t conflict with other local regulations?”

Farmer asked if the legal opinion cited any statutes. Roach confirmed it did not.

Vice-chairman Ethan Shaffer agreed the wording on the article could be made more clear and voters should get an opportunity to decide whether the town meeting reverts back to an open meeting. However, his opinion was that secret ballot was better, he said.

“Open forum gives a chance for the loudest people to be heard,” he explained. “They are the ones that will speak and do speak. The folks that will never speak, will still not speak. This way has more folks voting than we have at a regular meeting.”

Shaffer said the board was going to ‘pause’ discussion until a full board was present. Board members Keith Savage and Samantha White were absent from the meeting.

“I’d also like clarification from Mr. Langsdorf since there is another attorney in the room asking about statutes,” he added.

He suggested Roach also reach out to Maine Municipal Association for direction. He was also interested legal opinion regarding the decision of town meeting format laying with exclusively with the board.

“What I heard here is actually good news,” Farmer said. “It all sits in your hands, according to your legal counsel.”

The board approved the draft warrant for the April 8 Special Town Meeting, pending legal opinion on the petition.

In other matters, Farmer, who is on the Comprehensive Review Committee, said the committee had been working on reworking the Comprehensive Plan with the hopes of presenting an updated plan to voters at the June Town Meeting. The plan would not be ready, as anticipated. Instead, the plan could be ready for a special town meeting in November.

“We are making good progress. I would like to take more time. We still have some data to come in. I think it is better to measure twice and cut once, rather than trying to force it,” Farmer said.

The current plan was adopted in 2012.