Whether a voter referendum reducing the number of seats on the Adams Township board of supervisors is placed on the November ballot apparently will be decided in court.

The Butler County commissioners, serving as the county election board, on Wednesday approved putting the referendum on the ballot for township voters.

Commissioner Bill McCarrier, board chairman, said the referendum must be moved forward under state law.

“As county commissioner, we have no choice in the matter,” McCarrier said.

Township officials previously stated the referendum would be challenged in court.

A similar referendum passed by Center Township voters was overturned by a county judge in 2013 because it would have ended supervisors’ terms prematurely.

County solicitor Mike English said in an interview only the state attorney general has standing to defend the referendum in court.

Commissioner Jim Eckstein agreed.

“The state will have to rectify the situation,” Eckstein said during the meeting.

Charles Clark, the township resident who turned in a petition seeking the referendum, said he knows the county could not defend it against the pending court challenge.

The petition has 491 signatures. To be eligible for referendum consideration, a petition must have at least 5 percent of the respective municipality’s registered voters.

For Adams, that number is 442 names out of 8,854 voters in Adams.

Clark reiterated the issue is not that the supervisors disagreed with opponents of natural gas drilling restrictions.

He stressed the petition was circulated because the supervisors refused to listen to residents stating their case.

“It’s about never allowing a presentation of information,” Clark said.

Another township resident, John Watson, defended the supervisors, saying the presentation would have been much longer than what a public comment period would allow.

Watson spoke against the proposed change, saying supervisors’ terms should not be shortened by a referendum.

“It’s scary to me,” Watson said.

He said the looming court battle is unnecessary.

“It’s a waste of taxpayers’ money to pursue it through the courts,” Watson said.

However, he said he understood the county’s hands were tied.