Mattapoisett Select Board tables member expansion vote

MATTAPOISETT — After Town Meeting approved a citizens petition to expand the Mattapoisett Select Board from three to five members, Select Board members met on Tuesday, May 27 to discuss the next steps.

To increase the size of the Board, Select Board members must send a petition to the state legislature for approval.

With debate from residents for and against expanding the Board, members voted to table further discussions until Town Meeting results have been certified, which must be done by June 3.

“It would be disingenuous for any board — three or five — to act on an article that has not been certified and the certification is not in hand,” said Select Board member Jordan Collyer.

Those in favor of increasing the Board pointed out that Town Meeting already voted on and approved of expanding the Board.

“It seems like now the will of the people — the democracy — is being sort of stymied because this particular article is not popular here,” said resident Nicole Lynch.

According to Town Administrator Michael Lorenco, while Town Meeting can “provide the will to the people,” the Select Board is the “only power that can petition the legislature to pass a home rule petition.”

Home rule petitions are requests made by towns or cities to the state legislature that can alter the community’s government structure.

One resident who recently moved back to the area from Florida asked why the Select Board members seemed afraid to have two additional members on the Board, noting “it would be helpful for everybody.”

“I’m not afraid of anything, quite frankly, and I will generally uphold the will of Town Meeting, but I have several concerns, least of which we don’t have a certified vote,” Collyer said.

While Chair Tyler Macallister said he agreed that Town Meeting spoke, he added “that doesn’t necessarily mean I agree with it” and voiced several concerns, including how the vote was handled at Town Meeting.

According to Macallister, “There were a number of non-voters in the audience that didn’t sit in the designated area.”

He also noted that from where he sat during Town Meeting, there didn’t appear to be an overwhelming majority of votes in favor of expanding the Select Board — a claim that people at the Select Board meeting disagreed with.

Macallister estimated that “roughly one third” of voters left Town Meeting after voting on whether to expand the Board.

“I cannot — and I’m making this clear — cannot in good conscience move this forward without a vote of the town,” Macallister said. “Because — I’m telling you right now — I would say no less than 50 people have asked me if we were going to have a vote after Town Meeting.”

Several residents argued that the fact that people left Town Meeting after voting on the petition shouldn’t affect the decision to move forward with expanding the Board.

“It doesn’t particularly matter whether people left or not, as long as they were officially checked in as members of the town and [it’s] your right to be there for all of the meeting or some of the meeting,” said Betsy Stewart, who was recently elected to the Old Rochester School Committee.

Resident Michael Immel argued that the fact that people left after voting on whether to expand the Board shouldn’t be a factor to consider.

“If we believe in Town Meeting, which is the old New England tradition and there’s been … 300 years of it here, why do you dilly-dally with that?” he said. “Leave it. Send the charter up to the state and make it legit.”

Residents in favor of keeping the Board at three members questioned why the Board’s size, which has been three members for the past 150 years, was suddenly an issue and argued that the question should be put on a ballot so more people have an opportunity to vote on it.