A fractured Winthrop Town Council voted to dissolve its Rules and Ordinance Committee for six-month trial period, as part of a broad protest against the panel’s president, his level of control over the governing body, and the pace of housing construction.

The five council members, in a growing revolt against the body’s president, Jim Letterie, approved the change at a special meeting called for Tuesday at a moment timed for when Mr Letterie was known to be heading out of town for his son’s wedding.

The council members, in their proposed overhaul of the council’s operations, suggested a series of restrictions on the council president’s right to lead the council and to fill the various committees and panels that oversee and assess town operations.

Development targeted

The council members described a particular focus on the town’s Central Business District, putting forth proposals that would lower height restrictions in the area; toughen or ban exemptions from current requirements that developers provide parking spaces that reflect the expected use of their developments; and increase the allowance of ground-floor residences.

The meeting – called on short notice during Mr Letterie’s absence – put on full view a split on the council that has emerged in the past year as Mr Letterie has conceded that Winthrop is unlikely to succeed in its long-running battle against the state’s 3A housing law.

The tactic of a hastily arranged meeting for Tuesday left the council seats empty for both Mr Letterie and the council’s vice president, Suzanne Swope, who joined remotely and declared herself ineligible to lead the meeting through a Zoom connection.

That led the council to an opening scene in which member Kim Dimes proposed that their meeting be shepherded in the Letterie-Swope absences by the longest-serving member in the room, Max Tassinari, only to have a five-member faction backing Patrick Costigan vote to instead install him as the temporary chair.

Legal jousting

The session also included extended exchanges in which the town’s legal counsel, James Cipoletta, was repeatedly asked by council members to assess whether the meeting, and elements of it, had been legally scheduled. The results included a divided council agreeing that the meeting could occur, but allowing final action on only the vote to suspend the council’s practice of subjecting new proposals for council actions to assessments by the panel’s three-member Rules and Ordinance Committee.

The display of division generated condemnations from residents across a political divide that had previously existed over housing and other issues in town. They included Kathleen Riley Cappuccio, a longtime opponent of 3A compliance, who called the council’s behavior “disgraceful” and ego-driven, saying, “This has nothing to do with the good of the Winthrop community;” and Peter Gill, a former Town Council president and 3A opponent, who urged the meeting be adjourned immediately. Backers of 3A compliance making similar arguments included Celeste Ribeiro Hewitt, a council candidate last year and advocate of 3A compliance, who told the council: “This is 100 percent about ego, it is 100 percent about popularity test.”

The motions to restrict development in the Central Business District and to weaken the political power of the council president were brought by council member Joseph Romano. Mr Romano eventually agreed to postpone votes on his proposals other than the one to suspend the rules committee.

Mr Tassinari nevertheless made a point of citing the idea to lower building height limits in the Central Business District from 48 feet to 35 feet, saying the town “will be bankrupt” fighting lawsuits from building owners in the area whose property values would get sharply reduced. Mr Romano said he did not necessarily disagree and expected that question to be studied as part of the council’s regular review processes.

Fractured council

Mr Romano offered limited explanations of his reasoning for any of the maneuvering beyond suggesting that the Rules and Ordinance Committee largely slowed down the process of writing ordinances without creating any greater public understanding of the issues it handles.

Ms Dimes also put forth a proposal to ban the Town Council’s use of artificial intelligence in any of its work until the town conducts a review of AI’s use in municipal affairs. She withdrew the idea after council member Paul Reardon noted that AI already is embedded in a variety of computer applications, and suggested the need for a plan that more clearly defined what would be studied and banned in the interim.

Mr Letterie, speaking earlier in the day ahead of the council meeting as he prepared for his family’s wedding gathering, said he was disappointed that the members called the special session rather than wait for the council’s next regularly scheduled meeting.

He also expressed concern over the message the situation sends about the functionality of the town government. “The council seems to be fractured,” Mr Letterie said.