Should voters rescind the affordable housing bylaw passed at a Town Meeting last year? That’s the question posed by an article one Selectman proposed at last week’s board meeting.

Select Board member Peter Teitelbaum proposed an article for Special Town Meeting that would effectively annul one bylaw that voters approved last spring.

“This bylaw’s turned into a disaster, procedurally,” Teitelbaum said during the meeting.

He was referencing Article 26, an affordable housing proposal that was also approved by Attorney General Maura Healey in December 2021 — with a postscript.

The article comes from a citizen’s petition authored by Brenda Eckstrom, a former Select Board member and current candidate for the Select Board seat Teitelbaum is resigning from on Election Day.

The approved bylaw tackles affordable housing in Wareham by reducing the minimum lot size for certain homes. The article was designed to let homeowners subdivide their land and create new residences more easily, adding to the town’s affordable housing stock.

Healey approved the article on Dec. 23, but she cautioned that the town should discuss the bylaw’s application with Town Counsel and the Department of Housing and Community Development to ensure the article complies with certain state laws. Part of the bylaw’s purpose was to help the town reach a point where 10 percent of the housing stock is deemed affordable. Under state law, commonly known as Chapter 40B, towns have less leeway to refuse apartment developments if less than 10 percent of their housing stock is deemed affordable.

The wording of the original bylaw was slightly inconsistent with state law, which Healey advised should be fixed so new residences built under the bylaw would actually count toward Wareham’s affordable housing stock.

Eckstrom submitted another citizen’s petition for the upcoming Spring Town Meeting, with the goal of fine-tuning the amendment’s wording to satisfy state requirements.

In the Select Board meeting, Teitelbaum proposed his article to rescind the town’s prior approval Eckstrom’s bylaw.

“I understand that the Town Planner and Town Counsel have spoken with the petitioner,” Teitelbaum said at the meeting, “and that the latest iteration from the petitioner that wound up on the regular warrant still is screwed up.

“There’s nothing here that can’t be done by going in and getting a variance anyway.”

When asked at Candidates’ Night about his proposal, Teitelbaum gave no comment.

During the Select Board meeting, members discussed the wording of Teitelbaum’s proposal, and some took issue with what was described as the final paragraph of his article’s text.

“I don’t mind the idea of what you are trying to do,” member Jim Munise said. “But I do not approve of the last paragraph which I find as defamatory. And also at the same time, I don’t think any of us should be speaking about any of the candidates during our Selectmen's meetings, one way or another.

“I cannot support this because of that last paragraph.”

Teitelbaum said he could change the article’s explanation to reflect “procedural difficulties” of the article he hopes to rescind.

The text of Teitelbaum’s original proposal was not made available as of Tuesday afternoon, and the Special Town Warrant released on Monday — which includes Teitelbaum’s article — does not make mention of any specific petitioner or candidate in describing the article.

Petitioner and Select Board candidate Eckstrom said when she first heard the proposed article meant to rescind the affordable housing bylaw, she was surprised.

“I was appalled, I was shocked,” she said.

A few people looking to utilize the new amendment called Eckstrom, she said, after last week’s Select Board meeting, reportedly trying to figure out if they could still try to ask the town to use the bylaw to subdivide their land or add an in-law apartment.

Eckstrom said the town isn’t prepared yet to offer residents full use of the bylaw.

“They have nothing ready for this,” she said.

This was partially confirmed by Munise at Monday night’s Candidates’ Night, when he addressed the bylaw in answering a question about affordable housing in Wareham.

“Hopefully we’ll work out the kinks,” he said, referencing the original affordable housing bylaw. “Interestingly, someone contacted us today and they wanted to know what the process was in order to — the application process. And truthfully, we have not implemented that. And the Board of Selectmen are part of that process, so we need to work with inspectional services to get that rolling.”

Moderator Claire Smith said that articles have been rescinded in the past, not a lot, but the practice is not entirely novel.

If Teitelbaum’s proposal is passed at Town Meeting, within the same night that voters will decide on  Eckstrom’s updated article, Smith said the Attorney General would still have to approve the rescinding proposal.

Within the 90 days that the Attorney General has to approve or deny an article voted on at Town Meeting, the prior zoning article would still remain in effect, Smith said.

“It doesn’t happen immediately,” she clarified, adding that she wasn’t sure what the Attorney General’s office would do with the original zoning article at that time.