Council schedules hearing on charter changes after legal staff warns of permissive referendum risk

Mayor Safford opened the meeting and introduced local-law amendments to Title 4 (internal audit language) and Title 11.6 (public-works contracting thresholds) of the Saratoga Springs City Charter and said a public hearing will be held tomorrow to receive comment and potentially vote on the changes.

Tony, a city staff member, told the council that because of the sections’ content they are “susceptible to a permissive referendum,” explaining that if enough electors sign a timely petition within 45 days the enactment would be placed on the ballot at the next general election. “That means that the local legislative body enacts it and within 45 days of the enactment, if enough electors of the city sign a petition to put it on the ballot for referendum at the next general election, then that happens,” Tony said.

Vince, a city staff presenter, described the Title 4 change as clarifying that the commissioner of finance “may, conduct, audits of selected departments as deemed necessary or upon request of counsel” and added language requiring an independent outside auditor if the finance commissioner is conflicted. On Title 11.6, Vince said the amendment aligns the city’s contract thresholds with Article 5‑a of the New York General Municipal Law and replaces older language about awarding to the "lowest responsible bidder" with a directive to conform to Article 5‑a requirements; he noted municipalities may adopt a separate local law to use a "best value" approach.

Council members sought and received clarification that the revisions do not strip the finance commissioner of authority to order internal audits. Commissioner Kiernan noted there have been few internal audits in recent years and urged scheduling audits to improve internal controls and operational efficiency.

The council set a public hearing for the local laws and plans to take the vote at the next meeting; staff warned the changes may be subject to permissive referendum, which could delay implementation if petitioners succeed.