Some residents are still upset about a winter meeting of some Town Meeting members and officials of Competitive Power Ventures that they believe led to the defeat of a measure that would have kept a power plant from locating in town.
A committee appointed by selectmen is revising that proposal in the hopes that next time Town Meeting will approve it and thereby keep out certain so-called "noxious" uses, including a power plant.
On Monday, that committee met for the first time.
According to member Ann Marie Kinnally, the inaugural session consisted of getting acquainted and examining steps the panel will take to revise the town's table of permitted land uses and get Town Meeting to endorse their work.
The next meeting is scheduled for May 27, she said.
The revised table of uses needs to be ready by July 4 if it's going to make the fall Town Meeting warrant, Planning Board Chairman Jack Conroy said.
The committee is toiling in the wake of the March 10 special Town Meeting, when members shot down by nine votes a measure to tighten zoning laws.
Some residents trace that defeat directly to a gathering of residents, Town Meeting members and Competitive Power officials. They say the company, whether intending to or not, sowed fear among those in attendance, a fear that carried over to the floor of Town Meeting four days later.
The gathering took place at a home in Precinct 4, within a mile or so from the Industrial Road location where Competitive Power wants to build its 580-megawatt facility.
Kevin Foley, who organized the session, said more than 30 Town Meeting members as well as others residents attended.
Some residents accuse the power company of suggesting to those on hand that if Town Meeting passed tighter restrictions and effectively killed the company's proposal, another firm might come into town and use state procedures to get a power plant on Industrial Road anyway.
John Vaillancourt, a candidate for Town Meeting member, termed the gathering an improper, "behind-closed-doors" meeting.
"This is very upsetting to myself - and the citizens of Walpole," said Vaillancourt.
Around the time of special Town Meeting there were rumors of Town Meeting members meeting with Competitive Power, but "everyone denied it," he said. Now, "lo and behold ... such meetings took place."
The Web site empowerwalpole.org, set up by concerned residents, frames the issue as "the latest of (Competitive Power's) many attempts to manipulate Walpole public policy by influencing our public officials in private meetings."
But Foley, the organizer of the get-together, said people on both sides of the power plant issue attended, and an exchange of questions and answers among all those on hand was valuable.
"It wasn't a hidden thing," said Foley, a Precinct 4 member.
Meeting to talk about town issues is fairly common, he said.
"It's my job (as a Town Meeting member) to find out what my constituents feel," he said.
On Tuesday night, for example, members and residents gathered to talk about the June 7 town election, Foley said.
Foley said the March 6 meeting with Competitive Power provided a forum that was "free of hostility" and at which residents could get their questions about the power plant answered.
He called Jim Brady, a local attorney representing Competitive Power, and asked if the power company would be able to attend a question-and-answer session.
Competitive Power officials confirmed that Town Meeting members approached the company seeking more information.
Braith Kelly, Competitive Power's vice president and public affairs counsel, said it was not the first; there were a couple of earlier meetings as well.
Foley said he arranged the meeting by calling close to half of the 150 members. If they didn't pick up the phone, he left detailed messages about the meeting. He said he would have invited all 150, but worried about fitting them all in the house.
At issue was the proposal to eliminate an ambiguous clause from the zoning use table that allows siting of "any other lawful industrial or wholesale business, service, storage or light manufacturing use."
Getting rid of the "any other lawful use" clause would also have barred so-called "noxious" uses such as coal elevators, sawmills and petroleum storage plants. The article fell nine votes short of passing.
In assessing the special Town Meeting roll call vote, Foley said of those who attended the March 6 gathering, "certainly not everybody voted one way or another."
Near the end of the question-and-answer session at the March 6 gathering, a Town Meeting member asked what the proposed zoning amendment would do, and how it would affect the power plant proposal, Kelly said.
Competitive Power representatives responded that, in the case of a power plant, the amendment would likely leave a company with no means of working with the town, Kelly said.
The question came from the crowd, Kelly stressed. Under the circumstances, Competitive Power "had a responsibility to make folks understand that it would have had an impact" on the power plant proposal.
At the same time, the company told the audience the amendment would not stop a power company from going to the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board to override the town's zoning bylaws, Kelly said.
Representatives told the crowd that although Competitive Power had no intention of pursuing that override of town authority, another company might, Kelly said.
Jeb Bobseine can be reached at jeb@walpoletimes.com or 508-668-0243, ext. 13.
