Saratoga Springs council weighs charter changes as city attorney warns one provision may require referendum

Mayor Safford led a discussion of proposed Local Law No. 4 (2026) on amendments to the Saratoga Springs City Charter, saying the council would review several recommended changes and may vote on uncontroversial items at its next meeting.

City Attorney Tony Izzo advised the council that one proposed change — a revision to the section on filling vacancies — appears to trigger a mandatory referendum under Section 23 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, while two other changes (internal audit method and raising the contract limit) may be subject to a permissive referendum under Section 24. Izzo explained that a permissive referendum means the council enacts the law but it could be sent to the ballot if enough petition signatures are gathered within 45 days.

The legal warning set the tone for a heated procedural discussion. Commissioner Karamati said, "I have come to the conclusion that no changes should be made to the existing charter of the city," arguing the charter is "a document of the people" and that the current package does not address the city's central financial crisis. By contrast, Commissioner Cole defended targeted amendments as practical improvements for departmental operations, saying the language changes "are legal and they are wise" and noting proposals such as aligning appointments with civil service law and adding a civilian review board.

Several commissioners proposed a compromise: remove or separate items that Izzo identified as referendum-eligible or that lacked consensus, then vote on measures with unanimous support at the next council meeting. Mayor Safford said there will be a public hearing at the next meeting and that he planned to close the hearing and move forward with votes on items the council could approve without controversy.

No final charter votes were taken during this session. The council entered an executive session earlier in the meeting for pending litigation (Jagoda v. City of Saratoga Springs) and reported afterward that it had received an update and taken no formal action. The mayor and staff said procedural motions and final language would be prepared after the meeting so the council could act on appropriate items at the next meeting.

What happens next: The council will hold a public hearing at the next meeting; contested changes and those counsel flagged for referendum risk will be separated from uncontroversial technical corrections and considered under different procedural paths.