Selectmen have long argued that the town should lease 18.5 acres of land off Charlotte Furnace Road known as the Westfield Site (part of the larger 72.52-acre Westfield Property) to a developer for the construction of senior housing. Opponents of the project have equally long argued that restrictions on the use of the property prohibit such development.

Without touching on all the pros and cons of the Westfield proposal - which voters will be asked to consider in the form of a non-binding referendum in the April 6 Town Election - this is an attempt to get to the bottom of the restriction-or-no-restriction debate.

The simple explanation is that it's not simple. The legal situation is muddy in several areas. But the following can be said with certainty:

1.  There are documents on file at the Registry of Deeds that restrict use of the land. There are also documents on file that do not restrict the use of land. While not necessarily making the land undevelopable, this conflict could make it difficult for a developer to obtain a clear title for a long-term lease of the land.
2.  These restrictions could probably be lifted by a vote of Wareham Town Meeting.
3.  It is unclear, legally, whether leasing the property to a developer and/or lifting those restrictions would require a simple majority vote or a two-thirds majority vote at Town Meeting.

Following is a brief explanation of each of those points.

The legal restrictions
The town was given the land in 1977 by the previous owner, Campanelli Inc., with a deed that described the property according to a subdivision plan, including some dedicated recreational and green space, as "subject to and for the benefit of all easement restrictions, easement reservations, covenants, agreements and any other encumbrance of record insofar as the same are now in force and applicable." The voters unanimously accepted the land "for municipal purposes" under Article 10 of the June 30, 1977 Special Town Meeting. In two Orders of Taking, signed in August and recorded at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds, the Selectmen added restrictions that the land be used "for school or municipal buildings, and/or recreational, playground and park purposes..."

What town meeting giveth, town meeting can taketh away
Under Massachusetts Municipal law, the voters at Town Meeting can change the use of property acquired by the town.

What kind of majority?
One side of the legal argument, as held by Town Counsel Kopelman and Paige, is that if the town can use the property for "municipal purposes" as voted at the Special Town Meeting in 1977, then the Selectmen can lease the property to a developer with the approval of a simple majority vote at Town Meeting. On the other side of the legal argument, if the town holds the property subject to the restrictions set forth in the Orders of Taking, then a two-thirds vote at Town Meeting would be required for the Selectmen to lift the restrictions and lease to a developer.
Kopelman and Paige recommended the town obtain a two-thirds majority vote as a cautionary measure. The Westfield Article at last October's Town Meeting did not specify that a two-thirds majority was required, and there appears to have been confusion over whether a simple majority or a two-thirds vote was needed.