LONGMEADOW – The Longmeadow High School gymnasium was nearly full as residents voted on the warrant articles on hand at the Jan. 17 Special Town Meeting–one which could lead to giving Longmeadow residents the right to recall elected officials in the town.

Though the Warrant had three articles slated for the Special Town Meeting, Article Three was presented as a revision to Article One with stronger language.

Articles One and Three looked to amend the Home Rule Charter to grant registered voters the power to recall elected officials in Longmeadow. At Town Meeting, Article One was brought to a vote for no action, to which the vote passed with a majority affirmative vote.

Later in the Special Town Meeting, lead petitioner for Article Three, Patrick O’Shea, came before the attendees to speak to the article. First, he amended minor typographical errors. The town voted to amend said efforts. He then proceeded to describe what would occur should Article Three pass.

“Tonight is just a proposal to enact legislation in this town to allow for the possibility of a recall vote,” O’Shea stated. He then noted that this pushes the town’s “current situation” aside, referencing the strife between some town residents and the School Committee members.

O’Shea explained that if Article Three was passed by Town meeting, the Town Clerk would then submit a bill that would grant registered voters the power to recall specified elected officials in Longmeadow to the State Legislature. O’Shea noted a current situation in the town of Fall River, where the mayor has been indicted.

“Fall River has recall language in their town documents; the voters and residents have the possibility to vote that indicted mayor out of town,” O’Shea explained. “In the absence of such language, he would be allowed to serve his full term.”

He then shared that by Mass General Law; the Select Board would be exempt from being able to be recalled from their positions. The only party who would be able to recall Select Board members, O’Shea explained, would be a Charter Committee selected by the Select Board.

Should a recall situation arise, he stated, 15 percent of registered voters would have to sign a recall petition within 45 days. There are approximately 11,780 voters in Longmeadow, and 15 percent of that number of voters equals 1,767 signatures to allow for a recall. Additionally, there is a minimum of 50 signatures required from each of Longmeadow’s five precincts.

Following a signature turn–in, the Select Board would order a vote within 60 to 90 days. If an election is already scheduled within 100 days of turning in signatures, there is a choice to have the vote occur at the regular election.

Moving on, a representative of the opposition of the article, Jennifer Falcone came before Special Town Meeting attendees.

“This is a complex and changing legal document that must be carefully examined,” Falcone said. “Proponents say it will increase accountability but why wouldn’t we want that for everyone, it leaves out the Select Board. If we want more accountability for our elected officials it should apply to everyone.”

Continuing, she added, “If you can create recall elections based on opinions this town could turn into a three ring circus every time a vote comes.”

Moving to resident comments, Gerald Douquette came before the town and moved to amend Article Three. He explained that he would like the article to not affect current elected officials, allowing the town to make decisions without “worrying about precipitated events” so they could “separate out the passions of the moment.”

Resident Mark Habert stood and responded to Douquette’s proposed amendment, “There are individuals…there are committees that may have brought certain challenges to our community that may have brought us here tonight, and that is something I would want to address without a motion.”

Following discussion by multiple residents, the motion to amend the article brought forth by Douquette failed by a majority affirmative vote.

Immediately after this attempt, resident Ryan David Crawford made a motion to amend section F to increase 15 percent of voters to 30 percent of voters.

“I’m asking for the increase because I do have experience with recalls,” Crawford stated. He continued to explain that he is from California, and in California each elected official is subject to a recall vote. Crawford shared that he felt the bar must be set “monumentally high” so that the situations when a recall option is valid voters will recall someone, but if the bar is set low, it could “become meaningless.”

The motion to amend Article Three failed by majority vote.

Former School Committee member and resident Russell Dupere stated that he felt this is a “very dangerous precedent to set.”

Resident Alex Grant and former Select Board member questioned the audience, asking if each voter would be willing to campaign for an elected board or committee knowing that they could be recalled.

“How many of you would campaign and serve? If you would honestly say, you know what, that’s not for me, then ask yourself. How many good people, if you won’t do it, do you think would want to serve under those circumstances?” he asked.

Closing out the discussion there was a motion to call the question in order. The vote required a 2/3 majority in order to stop the debate. The motion passed.

Voters proceeded to vote with ballots and ballot boxes, voting either “yes” to pass Article Three or “no” to not pass Article Three. Following the vote and count, Town Moderator Rebecca Townsend shared that there were 635 yes votes and 235 no votes. The motion passed with a majority 2/3 declaration vote.