A significant portion of the meeting focused on the Renewable Choice program, initiated by Rebecca Liberman, a resident who raised issues regarding outdated information and potential overcharges on customers’ bills. Liberman highlighted that her October bill inaccurately stated the availability of the Renewable Choice program to commercial customers by 2022 instead of the expected 2024. She pointed out discrepancies in the options for residential customers, noting that “all residential customers now get over 50% renewable power through REC retirement,” which made the 50% tier obsolete. Liberman questioned how long customers at the 50% rate had been overpaying since customers reportedly received around 59% power from renewable sources for several months. She inquired about potential refunds for those affected, referencing a conversation with a staff member, Megan Woo, who mentioned an evaluation of the impact of higher REC retirements on the program.

Liberman further criticized the program’s promotion, stating that only about a hundred out of 33,000 customers were enrolled, a number likely to have decreased. She urged the board to address these issues promptly, stating, “you must also immediately stop overcharging your 50% Renewable Choice customers and issue refunds for any overpayments as soon as possible.” The board expressed an interest in investigating this matter further before the next meeting.

Additionally, the board explored the practicality of establishing a dedicated email address for public comments to better organize inputs and facilitate communication. A suggestion was made to forward relevant emails to board members as an interim solution, with plans to revisit this topic in their December meeting.

Another topic was the Charter Review process, which faced challenges due to a disorganized committee and the resignation of two members, including Bill Brown and a representative from the bylaw committee. Historical context was provided, tracing back to a 2001 Inspector General’s report that questioned the utility’s compliance with certain laws, leading to community concern and the formation of a committee to address these issues. The board discussed previous attempts to align the town’s charter with Chapter 164, governing utility operations, which were ultimately rejected by the Charter Review Committee.

The debate over the necessity of revisiting these changes was contentious. Some members questioned the motivation for changes, noting previous unsuccessful efforts and a lack of prompting from the Attorney General’s office. Disagreements arose over legal opinions regarding the proposed changes, particularly about employing an auditor appointed by the town’s audit committee. The board already had an independent auditor, and the proposed change was noted to contain inaccuracies. A motion was proposed to clarify the board’s position on pursuing any changes, emphasizing the need to address ongoing discussions and previous rejections.

The meeting also addressed the need for timely audits, with concerns about delayed auditing processes affecting approximately half a million dollars in reimbursement from ISO New England. The town’s auditors prioritized the town’s books before those of the RMLD, leading to financial jeopardy. The board highlighted the urgency for efficiency, with a member emphasizing that the auditor needs to be faster despite no complaints against them.

Discussions on local charter alignment with state law intensified, with members expressing differing opinions on potential charter changes. Tensions rose as members accused each other of trying to dominate conversations and dismissing the Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) contributions. One member insisted on the right of all participants to express their opinions, while another highlighted that the current discussion was focused on board recommendations to the Charter Commission. A motion was eventually put forward to align with the Town Council’s recommendation to avoid changes, maintaining the existing charter language.

The meeting concluded with a discussion regarding representation on the Charter Commission, with a member’s impending departure necessitating a replacement. A nomination was made and voted on before the board moved into executive session to discuss matters related to real property transactions, following the legal exemptions under Massachusetts General Law. The session ended with members favoring the move into executive session to allow for confidential discussions.