Truro Town Meeting 2025 | Overview ​

Town Meeting, held on May 3, 2025, involved significant but civil debate over housing, water, zoning, and more.  With a sizable turnout (430+/-),  a running theme in voting was the balance in addressing affordable/attainable housing and protecting water, environment, and town character. ​ The meeting highlighted the divide between younger residents advocating for housing solutions and long-term residents focused on water, environmental and zoning concerns.

Electronic Voting

The town meeting approved  a pilot of electronic voting for a trial year.

• A one-year trial of electronic voting equipment was endorsed by voters. ​
• The housing debate included predominantly millennials advocating for housing and expansive zoning changes versus predominantly senior residents concerned about environmental impacts and zoning protections. ​
• Key housing votes included the acceptance of the state’s “seasonal communities” designation and a significant zoning revision in the Walsh Overlay District. ​

Budget and Financial Measures Approved

The town’s operating budget and various financial measures were approved with challenges only to free cash use and purposes.

• The $27.7 million operating budget was passed without opposition.
• Article 3 on free cash was hotly debated over whether free cash was being used properly , included $45,000 for a zoning bylaw consultant, $40,000 for a public records consultant,  and salary for the Climate Action Coordinator  (a non-emergency need). Other items, including the $20,000 requested  for electronic voting pilot, were not challenged.
• A $3.2 million borrowing for PFAS contamination cleanup at Town Hall Hill was approved. ​

Solar Power Initiative and Environmental Concerns

A significant solar power initiative was approved, aimed at enhancing the town’s renewable energy capacity.

• A $5 million debt exclusion for solar arrays on town property was overwhelmingly approved. ​The first project will be developed for the transfer station.
• The initiative is expected to generate enough electricity to power all municipal buildings three times over​, creating excess energy for residential use.
• The project could yield $550,000 in new revenues annually, with $90,000 in maintenance costs.

Seasonal Communities Designation and Housing Authority Perspectives

The “seasonal communities” designation was a pivotal and contentious moment.  Created through the Affordable Homes Act, it grants limited priority status to designated Towns

• The designation allows towns meeting thresholds of part-time resident home percentages (35% + on Cape and 40%+ in the Berkshires) to take advantage of resources to promote year-round housing. ​
• Truro has a roughly 70% – 30% split in “part-timer” and “full-timer” homes, although both segments have a wide variety of periods in which they are residing in Truro with part-timers spending on average over six months a year in Truro and full-timers having a significant cohort of “snow-birders” residing outside of Truro for 2 to 5 months a year.
• Opponents questioned why we would adopt this designation when the requirements and State mandates attached to this designation will not be known until the Fall 2025. Supporters want the designation on the belief that funding opportunities this year could be missed, even though as a rural community  the same priority funding status applies. The measure passed on a 60%/40% basis.
• The measure also allows designated communities to raise the RTE to 50%, a notion that many voters and an overwhelming majority of part-time resident taxpayers oppose.

Zoning Overlay for Walsh Property ​

The zoning overlay for the Walsh property was a focal point of contention, ultimately passing with a narrow margin.

• The overlay aims to facilitate high-density multi-family housing, extensive commercial development, and open space on the 70-acre Walsh property. ​
• The changes to definitions and to zoning specifications were substantial, technical, often not explicit,  and arguably not well-understood by voters.
• The proposal passed with a vote of 154 to 127 (55% / 45%), despite concerns over water protection and non-existent, unfunded infrastructure.
• Challenges were made on the floor as to the basis of the vote (a Town Counsel opinion stated only simple majority is needed, but eligibility to be exempt for a 2/3 vote can only be made by the Planning Board or Select Board, neither of which made this determination.
• Supporters emphasized the need for affordable housing, while opponents raised concerns about overdevelopment.
• Various understandings about the number of units to be developed were stated, ranging to 40 to 80 to 160 to 260 to as much as the potential for 550-1,000 units given the zoning changes.  The most prevailing sense was the Walsh vote of 2024 calling for no more than 160 units was the upper limit.

Petitioned Articles

• Two petitioned articles regarding transfer of revenues  to achieve tax rate reductions and plowing private roads were indefinitely postponed due to legal format issues. ​
• A proposed a charter amendment to maintain finance committee independence by precluding appointment to other committees was referred to the Charter Review Committee for study. ​
• A nonbinding resolution to cap the cost of a new DPW facility at $20 million was barred by an immediate “call the vote” motion. Nonetheless it  lost by only 17 votes, the closest vote of the meeting.  This 47% vote is well above the 1/3 that would be needed to defeat a borrowing article for more than $20M at ATM 2026, so the article achieved its aim. ​