Central to the meeting was the select board’s resolution to terminate the existing committee structure. The proposed changes include relegating certain positions, such as the damkeeper, fire chief, and emergency management director, to non-voting roles while maintaining representatives from the select board, planning board, conservation commission, and board of health. The new structure would feature four seats for residents or property owners from the watershed and one at-large community member. This decision has been contentious, with some members questioning its legality, as it was reportedly not listed on the agenda for the relevant meeting. Concerns were voiced that this oversight might constitute a breach of open meeting laws, which could invalidate the vote.

In response, the committee is set to hold a joint meeting with the select board on July 7, where public opinion will be solicited. During the meeting, a member expressed doubt about the committee’s status as an “ad hoc committee” and suggested formalization to ensure transparency and compliance with legal standards. The need for legal counsel to assess the implications of appointing paid officials to voting positions was emphasized.

The debate also touched on whether the committee’s advisory nature mitigated conflict of interest concerns. It was argued that if the select board’s vote violated open meeting laws, state intervention might be necessary unless the board addresses the issue. The committee members collectively agreed on the necessity for clarity and legal guidance to function effectively and maintain credibility.

Another topic was the perceived lack of communication and collegiality from the select board. One committee member criticized the board’s decision-making process, noting, “It’s a real failure of collegiality for the select board to make major decisions about a committee without consulting that committee in any way in advance.” The sentiment was echoed by others, with a consensus that the select board’s actions led to confusion over representation and membership.

The restructuring decision has also raised concerns about the loss of experienced members, who are deemed essential for upcoming projects such as dam reconstruction and boat ramp repairs. A member stressed the need for expert voices within the committee.

Procedural changes regarding committee membership were another point of contention. Historically, appointments required select board approval, but the new requirement for all members to reapply was seen as unnecessary and disrespectful, particularly for long-serving members. Concerns were expressed about how this process might affect the committee’s continuity and effectiveness, especially in managing the lake’s environmental challenges.

The meeting included updates on dam activities, with one member reporting that the dam was nearing capacity. The committee acknowledged the need to maintain communication with GZA, the engineering firm involved, although contact with the firm has been sporadic.

Additionally, the committee was apprised of an upcoming Zoom meeting concerning the Lake Wyola Watershed engineering study on June 25. The study, linked to the dissolved stormwater task force, is important for stormwater management and ongoing environmental efforts. Committee members emphasized the importance of attending these meetings to review findings and progress their work.