ONE OF THE 640 voters who cast ballots in yesterday’s Special Election checked in with poll workers at about 9:25 a.m. (Mark Sardella Photo)
WAKEFIELD — Michael McLane is now a town councilor.
The Fairmount Avenue resident, who campaigned against runaway growth in Wakefield, won yesterday’s short Special Election race against former Town Councilor Paul Dinocco, 392 to 248. The results are technically unofficial.
McLane will fill the seat left vacant by the October death of Peter May. McLane will also be a candidate for a three-year Town Council term in the April 26 Annual Election.
Of the 20,115 registered voters eligible to participate in yesterday’s Special Election, about 3.18 percent of them actually did.
The Town Council contest was the only thing on the ballot.
DiNocco, who was a town councilor and selectman for 12 years, did not seek reelection in 2021. During the Special Election campaign, he ran on his experience and how it translates to the on-going budget-setting process for the fiscal year beginning July 1.
The Special Election was the result of a citizen petition filed at the beginning of December. Under Massachusetts law, 200 signatures of registered voters are required to force a special election to fill a vacancy on a Town Council or Board of Selectmen. Kristen Henshaw of Pierce Avenue submitted petitions containing 272 signatures to the Town Clerk’s office for certification. According to the Town Clerk’s Office, more than 200 of the signatures on the petition were certified as registered voters in Wakefield.
At a Nov. 8 meeting, the remaining six members of the Town Council listened to the advice of Town Clerk Betsy Sheeran and voted 5-1 against calling a special election, with the next regular Town Election just months away.
But the following week, Henshaw pulled petition paperwork to force a special election.
At that Nov. 8 Town Council meeting, Sheeran, who as Town Clerk administers local elections, outlined her opposition to holding a special election to fill the vacant Town Council seat.
“It’s a bad idea,” she told the board at the time. “I do not support the idea of holding a special election.”
Sheeran cited the required time for potential candidates to pull nomination papers, collect signatures and get the signatures certified, which would put the special election after the New Year. The winner of that special election would serve a few months at most, and then go into the regular Town Election as an incumbent.
“It’s not fair,” Sheeran said.
She also cited the $16,000 cost of holding an election — money that was not in this year’s budget.
In addition, such a special election would occur just as the Annual Town Election season is getting underway, Sheeran noted, potentially confusing voters.
Five of the Town Councilors agreed with Sheeran. Edward Dombroski was the lone councilor in favor of holding a special election.
He pointed out at the Nov. 8 meeting that there are seven seats for a reason. He worried that the Town Council could wind up with deadlocked 3-3 votes.
Dombroski also felt that having a seventh voice on the board was important and that it was unfair to deny a citizen the opportunity to serve.
“There’s value to three months-worth of representation,” Dombroski said.
In a previous letter to the Daily Item, Henshaw discussed her successful petition for a special election.
“Our small and determined group of seven citizens collected those signatures in less than three weeks,” she writes. “It was easier than we expected; Item readers were fully informed thanks to your newspaper’s coverage and letters in the Forum. Many were eager to sign. We even gained a few volunteers from your readership.
“There is no substitute for a free press and citizen participation,” Henshaw’s letter concludes.