ORANGE — Tempers flared at Town Hall on Wednesday and the woman serving as the Selectboard’s vice chair walked out of a meeting for the second time in almost two years.

Pat Lussier, in response to a comment Selectboard Chair Tom Smith made about a report filed by the Lake Mattawa Docks Subcommittee she served on, left the session in protest 30 minutes into it. Nearly two years ago, Lussier was the Selectboard’s clerk and stormed out of a meeting after being denied the vice chair position and accusing her colleagues of colluding against her.

“This is such a [expletive] joke. Yeah, I’m going to do it again, folks, because I can’t waste my time,” an infuriated Lussier said as she stood up to leave. “I can’t waste my time like this and look around at all your little cohorts, Tom.”

The point of contention was the continuation of a discussion regarding how to resolve the issue of unlicensed docks and other structures along the Lake Mattawa shoreline. The Selectboard in July 2024 received a complaint from the state Department of Environmental Protection that focused on Holtshire Road, where there are numerous docks, steps and decks, and access by the public is blocked by chains and “no trespassing” signs. This prompted the creation of the Lake Mattawa Docks Subcommittee to study regulations, permits and licensing.

Subcommittee member Kevin Mills delivered a presentation at the Selectboard’s Jan. 22 meeting, explaining that the subcommittee recommends the town request that MassDEP administer Chapter 91 licensing of the water-dependent structures on Lake Mattawa, as this will ensure a compliant, fair and equitable process for town residents. It would also substantially limit Orange’s administrative costs and eliminate the town’s responsibility to monitor compliance of the Chapter 91 waterways regulations.

Before Wednesday’s discussion began, Smith made a motion to disband the Lake Mattawa Docks Subcommittee. But Lussier said she would prefer to keep the group remain intact until there is a resolution to the issue. Selectboard Clerk Andrew Smith nodded his head in agreement but member Jane Peirce seconded Tom Smith’s motion. The Smiths are not related.

Andrew Smith started to say he sees no point in disbanding the committee, but he then remembered he has recused himself from this discussion due to having a personal, logistical and financial interest in the outcome. Tom Smith and Lussier agreed that disbanding the committee had been discussed at the Jan. 22 meeting, but Lussier said she had not foreseen this matter dragging on.

“We may have been premature in thinking that there might have been a vote that night,” she said. “So I would say that I think the committee would like to remain in force until we have some kind of a final vote on this.”

Peirce said she appreciates the subcommittee’s work and the proposal put before the Selectboard, “but frankly I don’t see a lot that can be salvaged from the recommendations and I don’t think that perpetuating the committee is going to take us in a direction that will be productive.”

Lussier asked Peirce if she wants to disregard everything the Lake Mattawa Docks Subcommittee recommended and Peirce replied, “No, not everything. But I don’t think that your committee can fix it.”

This prompted Lussier to say a conversation should be revisited regarding what she perceives as Peirce’s conflict of interest on this matter, as Peirce is a Lake Mattawa resident. Lussier cited Andrew Smith’s recusal and encouraged Peirce to follow suit.

“Nice try,” Peirce replied with a laugh. “Nice try.”

Tom Smith tried to call for a vote on his motion but Peirce told him to let Lussier finish.

“Jane has been under investigation, previously, for this matter,” she said. “And I have been interviewed by an inspector from the [state] Ethics Commission, at which time I supported Jane and I defended her and said, ‘When it was mentioned to her that she had a conflict she graciously stepped back and had no further involvement in it.’”

Selectboard member Julie Davis chimed in to say she didn’t think that was “the most appropriate conversation to have right now, if you’re talking about ethics investigations.”

Peirce responded that it would be a surprise to her to learn she was investigated and the Selectboard then took its vote on whether to disband the Lake Mattawa Docks Subcommittee — with Tom Smith, Peirce and Davis opting in favor of the motion and Lussier voting against it. Andrew Smith abstained.

Lussier advocated for the subcommittee and its research and recommendations. Tom Smith said Mills’ Jan. 22 presentation “was not the greatest” because he did not seem particularly informed.

“This is the method that you people use over and over again, when it’s something you just don’t like and you just don’t want to do,” Lussier argued. “So you get all your little ducks in a row — who’s going to make the motion and who’s going to second — and it’s such a crock the way you people run this.”

Tom Smith told Lussier she was being unprofessional and the matter was closed, regardless of whether she liked it. He reiterated that the presentation was handled poorly, likely because Mills was filling in for someone who didn’t show up. When Lussier referenced the subcommittee’s report, Tom Smith interjected, “If you want to call it a report — I don’t think it was a very good report.” This resulted in Lussier standing up and leaving.

A man near the room’s doorway began arguing with Tom Smith, who told the man to leave or he would call the police. Tom Smith declined to comment when contacted by the Greenfield Recorder on Thursday and an attempt to reach Lussier was unsuccessful.

Subcommittee member Rhonda Bartlett stood up in the audience and said she and her colleagues worked hard on the presentation delivered by Mills. She said Tom Smith’s comments were insulting and she had been hoping to get feedback on the subcommittee’s recommendations.

Peirce said she loves Lake Mattawa and its beauty but disagreed with the recommendation to remove many docks as a way to increase public access. She said she would have preferred a report that pointed out ways to leave the docks in the water while also increasing public access and making the boat launch safer.

Mills, who delivered the presentation on Jan. 22, approached the microphone and introduced himself as an “ex-member of the disbanded subcommittee.” He said dock owners need Chapter 91 licenses, but the real problem is people thinking they privately own the decks, steps and other structures they have installed on the town-owned shoreline.

Davis said she believes an absolutist approach won’t work, as “this is not a black-and-white issue.” She acknowledged docks and other structures need to be inspected and permitted but said she had hoped the presentation would suggest steps that could be taken to remedy the problem.

“There’s this thing called ‘grandfathering.’ We could grandfather things. We could make concessions. We could work together. We could be ‘The Friendly Town,’” she said, referencing Orange’s official moniker for itself. “We could do those things.”

Davis also asked everyone to “take a collective breath” and embrace “a better way of speaking with each other.”

Mills then pushed back on Tom Smith’s repeated claims that no other subcommittee members were present on Jan. 22, when Bruce Scherer, Bartlett and others were in attendance at that meeting.

“This town is literally corrupt, with the stuff that they do. They really are. They just let it go on,” Mills said.

Pierce later said the town must find a way to allow the existing docks to remain while also creating some fair regulations regarding size and quantity. She and Davis agreed to explore those possibilities and present their findings to their colleagues in four weeks.

Frances Rahaim, who lives on Holtshire Road, spoke for Lake Mattawa Association President Matthew Gilmore, who was on the agenda but could not attend the meeting. She read a statement that thanked the Selectboard for putting the association on the agenda and said the Jan. 22 presentation gave members a sense of the subcommittee’s conclusion, which association members appreciate. However, it was noted that all these discussions have taken place without the presence of town counsel or input from affected landowners.

“We are requesting that we be allowed to have our attorneys meet with town counsel to discuss progress toward a resolution that meets the goals of both the town and the residents,” Rahaim read.

Resident David Korpiewski mentioned he would like dock owners represented on any future docks subcommittees, as he perceived that many on the disbanded one were “very anti-dock.”

“And, you know, we are a republic, and as a republic we have representatives,” he said. “I don’t feel that committee was representative of the people affected by this policy.”

Before moving onto the next agenda item, Tom Smith reassured people in the audience he is not their enemy and he wants this issue to be resolved as much as they do. He said Lussier’s behavior was unacceptable and thanked people for their presence, generating applause.

Reach Domenic Poli at: dpoli@recorder.com or
413-930-4120.