Southampton Select Board approves ballot language and debates two override options as town meeting warrant is finalized

The Southampton Select Board on April 14 approved ballot language for two separate override questions and spent several hours finalizing wording and procedure for articles to appear at the May 2 annual town meeting and on the subsequent ballot.

Town staff and counsel walked the board through a three‑step approach to the town’s finances: approve a base budget at town meeting, authorize one or both override questions to be placed on the ballot, and treat the Hampshire Regional assessment as a separate article. Scott (Town Administrator) told the board the base budget as drafted relies on approximately $60,000 from the town’s operational stabilization account; using that money would require a two‑thirds vote at town meeting. He warned that, “if it doesn't get passed … essential services will be cut on July 1st” and that staff morale and continuity could be affected if the board did not present a clear plan to voters.

The board wrestled with procedure: Town counsel recommended presenting the higher figure first (the $2.5 million override) so that, if approved, it would encompass the smaller $1.9 million option. As the board discussed, voters at the ballot will see two independent questions; the higher dollar amount that achieves a majority vote would prevail. A Town Council representative summarized the ballot approach: “Each question requires a majority of those voting on that question to pass. If more than one passes, the question with the highest dollar amount will prevail.” The Select Board voted to adopt that standard ballot language and directed the Town Clerk to proceed with printing and distribution.

Members emphasized clear public summaries and handouts at town meeting, especially to show the total resulting budgets (not just marginal increases). Board members discussed logistics for possible floor amendments, the moderator’s discretion on reconsideration, and the practical need to have written amendments ready if the larger figure looked likely to fail. Several members suggested preparing appendix tables that show both the layered totals and the marginal increases so residents can see what each option funds.

The board also proposed keeping the Hampshire Regional School assessment (about $6.2 million) as a separate article. Members noted that a vote in another community could trigger additional timelines and that, if the regional assessment were voted down locally, the town might still be obligated depending on other districts’ actions; the board discussed a possible June special town meeting date to handle contingencies after ballots and insurance reconciliation data are final.

Town Clerk Lucy Dalan said ballots and early‑voting logistics are in motion: early in‑person voting will run May 11–18 (with a potential Saturday session May 16) and ballots were expected the week of May 4. The board agreed to meet again the week of April 22 to finalize warrant articles and to work with Finance Committee and town counsel to polish summaries.

The board’s action on ballot language was approved by voice vote; the meeting record indicates the language will be provided to the Town Clerk for printing and distribution ahead of the ballot.