Town Meeting spent over half of its three-hour session on Wednesday evening debating whether to accept the Charter Review Committee’s proposal to establish a five-member sewer commission, finally voting in favor of the idea after three amendments to the original article failed.

At present, Selectmen serve in a dual role as Sewer Commissioners. The charter change, if approved by the state legislature, will have the five sewer commissioners separately elected, with a requirement that at least three of them be residents whose homes are connected to the sewer system.

“I think we’ve gone far afield on this article,” noted resident John Donahue in speaking against the third proposed amendment to the original article.

After resident Cliff Sylvia moved the question, effectively ending the long debate, he received many enthusiastic “seconds.”

The extensive debate and the amendments nevertheless underscored the complexities facing the management of the sewer system and its finances. These complexities have become especially scrutinized in the last decade, as the State has required the town expand the sewer system to several neighborhoods in order to reduce nitrogen pollution in the waterways. The costs of this expansion as well as a $24-million sewer plant constructed in 2006 to accommodate the expanded system and other development resulted in significant rate hikes for sewer users, who represent about 40 percent of the households in town.

“I’ve spent three years trying to understand it, and I’ve got a lot to learn,” said Finance Committee member Bonnie Cottuli during debate on her amendment to kill the article and have the finances further studied before a new board was enacted.

Selectman Brenda Eckstrom agreed that the issue was complicated, although while arguing in favor of the article.

“I know it pretty well…but it takes a lot of a Selectmen’s time,” Selectman Eckstrom said. “If you do it right, it takes over 50 percent of the time of the Selectmen.”

And that was just the debate over the finance and management of the sewer system. For many sewer users, the fact that only they are billed for the expansion of the plant while the whole town benefits from cleaner water raises many fairness issues.

It was in details concerning this issue that continued the debate. As passed, the board will be comprised of five members with three-year terms. But it stipulates that “of these at least three commissioners shall be sewer users and at least one shall be a non-sewer user.”

Selectman Steve Holmes proposed an amendment to strike this requirement, arguing that it added an unrealistic eligibility requirement due to the nature of elections and term limits.

Resident Bob Brady proposed an amendment that the commissioners “with qualifications,” be appointed rather than elected.

But all amendments failed, and Town Meeting voted to pass the article and establish a Board of Sewer Commissioners with a 138-to-80 vote.

The rest of the meeting was comparatively smooth.

Town Meeting also voted to establish a seven-member board of road commissioners, removing another duty from the Selectmen. The duties of the current Personnel Board, which represents the two non-unionized employees in town, were transferred to the Town Administrator.

The only other substantial debate concerned a proposal that prevented any Town employee from holding political office and established a one-year residency requirement for candidates for elective town office.

Both raised many concerns of whether it would violate the civil-rights of citizens and was voted down.

“I guess sewers are always a messy business,” joked resident Michael Pohl, commenting about the article concerning sewer commissioners but iterating a feeling shared among many Town Meeting attendees. “And I should know, I live at the bottom of the hill.”