An effort to cap the fees for the extension of town sewer to the Oakdale and Cromesett neighborhoods at $18,000 per property was overwhelmingly approved by Town Meeting voters on Tuesday, 201-20.

Spearheaded by the Oakdale/Cromesett Betterment Association, the effort aimed to "correct an unfairly assessed betterment fee," Marilyn Jordan of the association told voters.

Recent sewering began with the "Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan," completed in 2002, which identified seven "needs areas" that the town should sewer to reduce pollution and otherwise maintain the town's waterways.

Various neighborhoods were bundled under sewer expansion contracts. The fee that each household must pay -- the "betterment fee" -- is calculated by dividing the total cost of a sewer project by the total number of households in the neighborhoods in the contract.

The Oakdale and Cromesett neighborhoods were sewered under "Contact 2" of the recent expansion projects. The final cost of the sewering is still being added up, but the residents' betterment -- which they must pay off within 20 years -- was an estimated $22,000 per home. Betterment fees for other recent projects have ranged from $12,000 to $17,000.

The Oakdale/Cromesett Betterment Association argued that the project was unfairly divided, and that the town may have violated Mass. General Law in doing so.

In arguing for the cap, the neighbors explained that dividing the cost of the sewer expansion by the number of total properties being sewered -- rather than breaking it down by neighborhood -- would have been more fair to everyone, and would have given everyone a betterment fee of nearly $18,000.

"We need to understand that, in the very beginning ... this was one contract," said Ron Robinson of Oakdale. "And arbitrarily, someone or someones decided to make this into more than one contract."

Proponents argued that the shortfall that would result from the residents paying less could be made up through grant funding. Some noted that the money could come from the town's increased meals/hotels tax. Others hoped that the money could come from the .5% difference between the 2.0% interest rate the town will pay for financing the project, and the 2.5% interest rate the town charges residents if they wish to finance their betterment payments.

Officials noted that the latter plan would come with issues, as the .5% is used to cover the town's "administrative costs." Also, some residents may choose not to finance and thus would not be charged interest.

With many impassioned voters presenting their case, the debate got heated at times.

"If I hear somebody else say 'neighborhood,' I'm going to blow up," said Selectman Chair Steve Holmes, who supported the proposal. "This is about the Town of Wareham!"

At one point, Town Moderator Claire Smith had to break up a brewing shouting match between Holmes, Finance Committee member Dominic Cammarano, and passionate voters.

"We're not going to have these outbursts. I'm going to lay it on the line. I will not allow it," a frustrated Smith yelled. "You are all adults. Let's act like it. ... I will have you ejected."

The Finance Committee was a vocal opponent of the proposal, though members noted that it wasn't for lack of sympathy for the situation. They simply worried about how to fill the gap between the residents' betterment fees and the cost of the project.

"It truly has been an injustice by former elected officials, and I know that the town wants to do the right thing," FinCom Chair Donna Bronk said of the betterment fee process. "But doing it this way, in my opinion, is not the right way."

Selectman Peter Teitelbaum acknowledged the Finance Committee's concerns, but said: "I think there are times in our town's history when morality trumps finance."

In other sewer business, an effort to establish an elected Board of Sewer Commissioners, effectively taking the oversight of the Sewer Department out of the hands of the Selectmen, was sent to further study.

The proposal was actually first passed at Town Meeting in October of 2010.

Because creating the Board of Sewer Commissioners requires a change to the Town Charter, the article must be filed with the Mass. State Legislature for approval.

The town went back and forth with state lawyers on language issues, and then the bill was not formally filed with the Legislature, Selectman Alan Slavin explained. The bill essentially died due to lack of action.

The current Town Meeting proposal reflected the changes in language made to the first bill, Slavin said. But voters this time around were unsure about the proposal, and ultimately decided that it should be studied more before a vote is taken.

Town Meeting didn't designate anyone to study the issue, nor did it establish a timeline for its return for a vote, but it was suggested that another article be prepared for spring Town Meeting.