By Carol Britton Meyer

In a long-awaited joint meeting with the light board, the select board voted 4-1 Wednesday night, following a lengthy and often-contentious discussion, to direct Town Counsel Brian Winner to file a home-rule petition with the state Legislature that would change the governance of the light plant in accordance with the passage of Article 37 at the spring annual town meeting.

The motion was made by select board member Jason McCann, who said that while he supports taking this step, he is disappointed in how long the process is taking and is concerned about whether a change in the governance would prove beneficial. Winner said he has a certified copy of the town meeting vote to include with the home-rule petition filing. Greg Grey was the only “nay” vote on the motion.

A video (CLICK HERE) produced by hull light board member jacob vaillancourt discusses the issues around implementation of article 37 and why the proposal’s sponsors think it should be implemented.

If the petition wins approval in the Legislature, the town manager would no longer serve as light plant manager.

The process is a long one, and the Legislature will make the final decision.

In the meantime, nothing will change with the light plant management, Select Board Chair Irwin Nesoff said.

Attorney Nicholas Scobbo, who represents the light plant, participated remotely, in part speaking about procedural issues.

The purpose of the meeting was to continue earlier discussions about the town meeting vote.

In May, voters approved by a 116-83 vote Article 37, which proposed returning to the independent management setup that was eliminated in 1993 when town meeting requested that a home-rule petition be filed on Beacon Hill. Although this year’s proposal was approved, Town Manager Jennifer Constable told the light board and select board earlier that legal counsel had deemed Article 37 as “not actionable” because it did not include provisions about filing special legislation.

‘We’re here for as long as it takes’

At the beginning of this week’s discussion, Nesoff told the board and the citizens in the audience, “We’re here for as long as it takes. There’s no time limit.” True to his word, the discussion lasted for one-and-a-half hours.

Nesoff also said that he was “looking forward to a civil and respectful discussion,” although the comments made by a few light board and select board members became heated at times.

As part of the discussion, Light Board Chair Thomas Burns – after reading the wording of Article 37 – said the light board “would like the select board to support it,” referring to the select board’s ability to file a home-rule petition.

Light Board member Patrick Cannon questioned the amount of time that has been spent on this issue, which he said is “sidelining” the board “when we have far bigger fish to fry to be sure the lights stay on.”

Light board member Dan Ciccariello – noting that town meeting voters supported changing the light plant governance – said “it’s really difficult to accept the fact that the select board would throw up road blocks to accomplish that goal. We are here tonight to urge the select board to vote to adopt this article and proceed to the State House.”

Grey voted against taking that route because of a number of as-yet-unanswered questions, including how residents would benefit from such a change.

“We still have no idea about how such a change would affect our citizens,” he said. “We have to make decisions in the best interests of the entire town.”

In response, light board member Jacob Vaillancourt, who filed the Article 37 citizens’ petition, said the board “is legally obligated to look out for the ratepayers and to keep the lights on.”

Member Brian McCarthy said he initially voted against Article 37 because he was not fully informed at the time, so took his cue from the advisory board’s unanimous vote to not support it.

However, following the town meeting vote and doing further research, he came to the conclusion that “the people voted, and the majority rules. I’ll end it there.”

While Nesoff voted in support of filing the home-rule petition, he said there are still issues that need to be addressed.

“I am disappointed that there was no attempt before town meeting to educate the people, but at this point, I think we should move forward [with the petition], and whatever happens in the Legislature happens, and the town will abide by that,” he said.

Select board member Jerry Taverna applauded the majority of the board for its decision.

“This is a big deal, following an open and honest debate tonight,” he said, especially since the advisory board did not support Article 37.

At the end of the discussion, Vaillancourt noted that “this is only a step in a long process that no one can predict. In the meantime, the light board has critical work to do, and we don’t want to lose the focus on that.”

A replay of this week’s meeting will be available on demand on Hull Community Television’s website, www.hulltv.net.

Like what you’re reading? Stay informed and support our work with a Hull Times subscription by clicking here.

Do you have an opinion to share? Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.