I do not believe that the Board of Canvassers has the right to block (a petitioner budget) just because somebody told the solicitor that they don’t like it and to find a way to block it.”

Petitioner Justin Katz

You can’t simply make up numbers to make your budget work. The rules haven’t changed. Simply because you have gone through a red light twice and gotten away with it doesn’t mean you are going to get away with it (this time).”

Town Administrator Christopher Cotta

TIVERTON — The Tiverton Board of Canvassers voted Thursday to toss out two petitioners’ budgets that had been put forth to challenge the budget presented by the Budget Committee and backed by the Town Council.

Following the advice of Town Solicitor Michael Marcello, the canvassers agreed that the two alternative budgets do not qualify as elector petition budgets under the town Charter so should not be presented to the voters.

The decision angered backers of both — Justin Katz whose budget would have raised taxes by less than the Budget Committee’s 4 percent hike, and the plan offered by School Committee members Deborah Pallasch and Diane Farnworth, which called for more spending.

Mr. Marcello said both plans violate the rules in several ways.

Mr. Katz’s plan, he said, proposes pulling $120,000 from casino revenue. That, he said, violates an ordinance passed by the Town Council that forbids the use of gaming revenues until fiscal year 2023.

“Therefore, that revenue cannot be used as a revenue source for any budget.”

And both petitioner budgets would tap the town General Fund for $1.6 million.

That, he said, violates section 301C of the Charter.

“My reading of the Charter limits petitioner budgets to raising money through taxation only … You can’t just make up revenue out of thin air,” he said. 

The Katz budget — and the Pallasch-Farnworth budget — “propose taking $1.6 million out of the General Fund, a number that really exists in thin air.”

In addition, he said, the Pallasch-Farnworth budget would exceed the 4 percent tax hike cap as it would raise taxation by 7.92 percent.

A Budget Committee member moved that both petition budgets be rejected, but Mr. Marcello said the committee should hear first from the petitioners.

“I’m not quite sure what the point is,” Mr. Katz said, because apparently the decision has already been made.

He called it ridiculous that the solicitor’s memo to the canvassers urging that the two petition budgets be denied had not been shared.

“They have a memo that I have not been privy to, have not been notified that this might be happening. I do not believe that the Board of Canvassers has the right to block petitions just because somebody told the solicitor that they don’t like it and to find a way to block it.”

He called “outlandish” the idea that a petitioner’s budget cannot touch non-tax revenue, saying previous budgets that he has submitted have done so.

“The Town Council wants its 4 percent tax increase to slide right through without opposition,” Mr. Katz said, adding that he does not agree with the council’s ban on the use of casino revenue on the budget. 

“We are looking this year at millions and millions of dollars that town government has kept off the books and hidden from taxpayers.”

Jeff Sora, attorney for Ms. Farnworth and Ms. Pallasch, said their budget was submitted 13 days ago and they were never told anything was amiss.”We have received absolutely no notice whatsoever about the alleged concerns.” 

He called it “a violation of constitutional due process. The petition itself is compliant with every component of the Town Charter.”

“The petition that we have submitted is pretty much in line with several previous petitions,” Ms. Farnworth said.

“It is simply not true,” Ms. Pallasch said, "that petitions cannot draw own the General Fund” — they have done so several times before, she added, showing a chart of past petitions. “We have had one set of rules in years 1 through 9 and in year 10 Mr. Marcello is telling us we have a new set of rules .. We are in the 9th inning and the Yankees are saying you need six strikeouts.”

“The rules haven’t changed,” Town Administrator Christopher Cotta said.”The rules have always been there. This was a huge bone of contention then and it still is, to allow a petitioner to simply make up revenue out of thin air. There is no way there is $1.6 million in the General Fund (and) if that money is not there we are going to have to re-tax people to generate it.”

“The rules are clear as day,” Mr. Cotta said, “You can’t simply make up numbers to make your budget work. The rules haven’t changed. Simply because you have gone through a red light twice and gotten away with it doesn’t mean you are going to get away with it (this time).”

With little discussion, the motion to reject the two petitions was made once more, received a second, and was approved.