Voters will not be able to weigh in on whether to allow firearms in town-owned buildings and parks after all.
By a 5-0 vote, the Select Board Tuesday reversed its earlier decision to put a non-binding referendum on the ballot in the May 17 town election. A yes vote would have supported exempting Plymouth from a state law banning firearms in municipal buildings, parks, and playgrounds, however it would not have had any practical effect.
It’s the second time the board has changed its position on the firearms exemption, a highly charged issue pushed by Police Chief Dana Flynn and backed by Town Manager Derek Brindisi.
Tuesday’s reversal came after a resounding defeat of the opt-out proposal at Saturday’s Town Meeting. By a vote of 112-33, with five abstentions, members rejected an article that would have exempted Plymouth from a clause in a sweeping state gun-safety law that took effect in October. By opting out, firearms would have been allowed in town-owned buildings – including Town Hall – as well as parks.
Prior to Town Meeting, the Select Board had supported putting the issue on the May 17 ballot. By a vote of 3-2, with Kevin Canty and John Mahoney dissenting.
The board had supported the referendum even though it had also just voted to recommend that Town Meeting not to take up the article allowing firearms in town-owned buildings and parks. The three Select Board members who had voted for the referendum, Dick Quintal, Charlie Bletzer, and David Golden, had argued that voters should have a say outside of Town Meeting. Golden had since the beginning sided with Canty in opposing a Town Meeting article to opt out of the firearms ban, although he also supported the nonbinding referendum allowing residents to weigh in.
On Tuesday night, Golden changed his position on the referendum, moving that the board reconsider allowing a ballot question. He cited the lopsided vote of Town Meeting.
“The vote was overwhelming and so I’m going to respect their vote,” he said.
Golden further explained his reversal in an interview with the Independent on Wednesday.
“Initially, I opposed putting this on the Town Meeting warrant because I don’t think Town Meeting is the place to discuss constitutional rights,” Golden said, adding that the courts are a better venue. He said he hoped that by putting the question on the May 17 ballot, it would cause Town Meeting to pause. But he said he supports the body’s decision to push forward and supports the assembly’s decision.
Once Town Meeting had decided the issue, Golden said, he decided it was best to move on.
“Rather than create any additional contention among the citizens through a ballot question, we might as well let the decision of Town Meeting stand,” Golden said. “I felt that Town Meeting’s vote was a powerful statement on where the community is.”
Quintal did not explain his reversal.
Bletzer, who earlier this month convinced Golden and Mahoney to support putting a non-binding question on the May ballot, backed down on Tuesday. But he was critical of Town Meeting for taking a vote on the firearms exemption.
“I agree with my colleagues that the right thing to do is to take it back,” Bletzer said of the ballot question. “My entire intent in proposing this ballot question was to hear from residents. I’m incredibly disappointed that Town Meeting decided to act and not wait for feedback from the voters, but that was their choice, and I respect their decision, and I respect the process.”
In an interview with the Independent, Bletzer, who is running for re-election for one of two seats in a five-person race on May 17, said Town Meeting would have made a better-informed decision had it waited to vote on the issue until after a referendum.
“They can at least have a tool, and they can take a look at the results of the election,” Bletzer said. “They can see precinct by precinct how everybody voted, and they could vote accordingly. That was my intent.”
When Bletzer first proposed the referendum at last week’s Select Board meeting, there was blowback to his move from some residents – including Town Meeting members – who said he was circumventing the town’s legislative process by calling for Town Meeting to stand down until after a referendum vote.
Canty – who is the only board member to have voted consistently on the issue – has maintained that it is not one that the town should decide. He said Tuesday that if people believe that the state law is unconstitutional, they should pursue the issue in court.
Several lawsuits have already been filed disputing parts of the state legislation. But Canty pointed out that a similar law in New York banning guns in government buildings was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit, and that the Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal of the case, letting the 2nd Circuit’s ruling stand.
Mahoney – who initially backed having Plymouth opt out of the law, then voted against a ballot question – said he saw no purpose in going forward with the referendum, considering Town Meeting’s action.
“A question like this will just further split the community down the middle,” said Mahoney, who is also running for re-election for one of two seats in the five-person race on May 17.
The opt out provision is part of “An Act Modernizing Firearms Laws,” a bill signed by Governor Maura Healey last July.
Firearms in schools and courthouses were already banned.
During public comment at Tuesday’s meeting, several people who had come prepared to urge the Select Board to cancel the ballot vote, instead thanked members for rescinding their earlier decision.
By a unanimous vote, the board did put another non-binding question on the ballot, following a petition by the Save Our Bay Coalition.
It asks voters whether they support asking town officials to urge state officials to order Holtec International to cease evaporating treated radioactive wastewater from the former Pilgrim nuclear power plant, in Manomet. Holtec is the company decommissioning the former plant.
The state has determined that Holtec does not need a permit to evaporate the wastewater.
Fred Thys can be reached at fred@plymouthindependent.org.