Residents press for moratorium and clearer process after pre‑approved projects advanced

At the forum, multiple residents said they felt insufficiently informed after staff approved or allowed previously approved developments to proceed during the town’s water emergency.

Several residents cited FOIA emails and a timing dispute over the Friendly’s/Broad Street project, saying the water‑impact analysis came after approvals. Officials responded that the project had form‑based‑code planning approval and that the subsequent water‑impact study was requested by the developer; staff said permitting rules and "prior‑approved" project status governed the decision in the absence of a council moratorium.

Residents urged the council to implement a moratorium on new hookups for projects that would materially increase demand. Council President Murphy and staff warned that a broad moratorium could jeopardize state grants tied to MBTA Communities compliance and other funding the town is relying on; they said the council is weighing narrowly tailored, legally reviewed measures and is in active dialogue with state grant officials.

State Representative Dennis Gallagher, who attended the forum, advised that recent Executive Office language allows case‑by‑case consideration for moratoria in declared water emergencies and said the state office would evaluate applications to avoid unfairly penalizing communities seeking emergency relief.

Officials said they are drafting clearer water‑impact procedures and rules to ensure future development decisions include explicit water-impact review steps and predictable decision-making. Residents asked the town to publish the list of pre‑approved projects and to improve public notice when approvals and impact studies are asynchronous.

The council has not adopted a town‑wide moratorium during this emergency; officials said that any moratorium would be a formal council action after legal review and public discussion.