By Carol Britton Meyer

One day after voting concluded in Hull’s extended annual town election, three new select board members – Jason McCann, Jerry Taverna, and Brian McCarthy – attended their first meeting Wednesday night, participating in the unanimous vote to elect Greg Grey as chair, Irwin Nesoff as vice chair, and McCann as clerk.

longtime Hull resident Kate Murphy, who celebrates her 101st birthday today (June 15), and her daughter, Michella Murphy, were among those voting in person on tuesday to finalize the election results.

All three expressed enthusiasm about having the opportunity to serve Hull citizens in their new roles.

Nesoff expressed appreciation for Town Clerk Lori West and her staff, working with Town Counsel James Lampke, for a “good and smooth outcome” for the May 15 town election and subsequent limited election on June 13 to finalize the vote counts after a road closures blocked vehicle access to the polls for part of Election Day.

Initially, Grey and Nesoff each nominated themselves to be the new chair, with a second for each, but after Taverna and McCarthy indicated that their vote would likely be for Grey due to his seniority on the board, Nesoff good-naturedly amended his motion to nominate Grey as chair and himself as vice chair “after reading the writing on the wall.”

At the same time, both McCarthy and Taverna said they would feel comfortable with either one being elected chair.

The following select board liaisons were appointed: McCarthy, Weir River Water System Citizen Advisory Board; McCann, Economic Development Committee; and Taverna, Plymouth County Advisory Board.

There was some discussion about how the next evening’s town manager finalists interviews would be conducted and whether to allow public comment. Taverna must recuse himself from the final selection of the town manager because that position supervises his wife, who is the town’s health director.

Also, there are plans to address, tentatively at the board’s June 28 meeting, the creation of a policy on whether to allow public comment on some, all, or no agenda items, during a specific public comment period, apart from public hearings, where the purpose is to allow public comment.

The issue is complex due to a recent state Supreme Judicial Court ruling that Lampke explained allows speakers broader parameters by prohibiting municipalities from requiring civility in public-comment periods. He said the select board would have little authority about how far someone could go, especially when potentially making negative comments about the board or a town employee, for example.

Lampke has begun crafting such a policy, which will be discussed by the board.

“We want to find a happy medium and to be efficient, open, and transparent while at the same time having a mechanism that is orderly in some fashion,” he said. “We will figure it out – and hopefully [what we come up with] will be acceptable to [citizens] – but we need to be very careful on what we ultimately adopt . . . so as not to create a liability.”

Town Manager Philip Lemnios noted that while it’s “easy to say” allowing public comment is important, doing so was easier before the court ruling, when the select board chair “could [use the gavel when someone was thought to be out of order], but that’s no longer the landscape.”

Grey said he’s more than willing to participate in a select board discussion “to see if there’s a way to get this done.”

In response to a question from a board member, Lampke explained that different rules apply to town meeting, which is under the control of the moderator, and that citizens are speaking on specific agenda items in that forum.

“What do you do when an individual is accusing a member of the board [of something that’s untrue] and the board has to sit there and listen to it without being able to correct [it]?” Lemnios asked.

While Lampke said that the chair can ask that person “to be polite,” Lemnios noted that he or she wouldn’t have to respond accordingly.

“This ruling has moved the guardrails from a four- to an eight-lane roadway, and it’s up to you as to whether you want to open up that roadway,” Lemnios said.

While the conversation will be a long one, Nesoff said he’s confident the board can “work something out with good leadership. It’s important for the public to have the opportunity to speak, and I would hate to see a few bad actors keep others from speaking.”

Do you have an opinion on this issue? Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.