BETHEL — Three days after voters decided to contract law enforcement duties to the Oxford County Sheriff’s Office, Town Manager Jim Doar met with Sheriff Wayne Gallant on Friday to work out the details.

Resident Scott Harlow continued to collect signatures on his petition to seek a revote of the issue. He believes many of those who voted yes, actually meant to vote against the contract.

In a 104-89 decision at Tuesday night’s special town meeting, townspeople authorized selectmen to negotiate and enter into a contract with the Sheriff’s Office to provide coverage to the town.

The decision will dissolve the Bethel Police Department when selectmen and Oxford County commissioners meet separately on Tuesday and approve the contract, Doar said Friday. That’s why he has drafted a contract based on Gallant’s proposal.

Doar met behind closed doors Friday with Gallant and Oxford County Administrator Scott Cole, who was Doar’s predecessor.

Even though selectmen are authorized to negotiate and enter into a contract with the county, Doar said it’s not a mandate.

However, Town Clerk Christen Mason said Friday that according to town law, selectmen must follow the will of the people.

“If it just said ‘negotiate,’ then it probably could be left open” to conjecture, Mason said.

She said no one had asked for a recount, but she confirmed that Harlow had started a petition drive.

Harlow’s petition asks, “To see if the town will authorize the Board of Selectmen to negotiate and enter into a contract with the county of Oxford that will require the Oxford County Sheriff’s Office to provide law enforcement to the town of Bethel.”

It’s the exact same wording that Tuesday night’s voters decided in Article 3, in which a ‘yes’ vote was to go with the county, and a ‘no’ vote would have kept the Bethel Police Department intact.

“There was a lot of misrepresentation and a lot of people were under the impression that a ‘yes’ vote was to keep our police department,” Harlow said.

By Friday afternoon, he said he was well past the halfway mark of collecting 168 signatures.

“I was surprised by the outcome, so I talked to many people,” he said. “The whole evening, talk was, ‘Yes, let’s save our police department.’ So, I’m seeking a revote, because it’s my belief that people will shoot it down.”

Both Mason and Doar said moderator Harry “Dutch” Dresser Jr. clearly told voters twice that a ‘yes’ vote meant they’d be approving the county coverage and a ‘no’ vote was to keep the Police Department.

Harlow said Dresser did explain the voting procedure. However, he said Dresser did so after 200 people in the room had stood to form lines to vote and were socializing to the point that no one could hear the moderator.

Harlow said that if his petition can force a revote, he would respect the decision from that meeting, “if it’s fair and evenly voted.”

[email protected]