BAR HARBOR – The Town Council’s recent decision not to reappoint architect Stewart Brecher to the planning board may prove the adage “be careful what you wish for.”

The council booted Brecher from the seven-member board, effective July 1. That prompted two other members to resign in protest.

In a town where development is often controversial and expensive, the numbers tell the story:

. Four board members are left, a bare quorum.

. As few as three members now constitute a legal voting bloc.

. As few as two members can approve a project, regardless of size and impact on the community.

. Zero volunteers have come forward in the past three weeks wanting to serve.

“We have a lot of major projects coming up,” town planner Anne Krieg said Tuesday. “It’s really important to have a board that represents the breadth of the population. Not having a full board is going to put a lot more pressure on the members who do come [to meetings] to reach a consensus in a way that represents the whole town.”

The council, in a special meeting last week, appointed Millard Dority, a former board member, to serve on a month-to-month basis.

Dority, facilities director for College of the Atlantic, stepped down from the planning board in 2003 because he needed to represent COA before the board.

Councilors are “actively seeking” new members, Krieg said, but as of Tuesday the town clerk had not received an application.

Councilor David Bowden, one of three councilors who declined to support Brecher for a new term, suggested the emergency meeting.

“I want the citizens to know that we have a handle on this thing and that we didn’t act irresponsibly,” Bowden wrote in a June 24 e-mail to other councilors. “Filling these vacancies quickly … will reassure them.”

Brecher is a longtime Bar Harbor architect who was appointed in 2002 to fill an unexpired term. In a recent interview, he talked about how much he enjoyed the work, despite the challenges, long hours and frequent debate among board members over their interpretations of the 200-page land use ordinance.

Brecher said he was mystified by the council’s vote because the councilors who refused to reappoint him had never talked to him, had never talked to the planning board chairman, and had rarely attended a meeting to even know how he performed.

“The council’s presence at [planning board] meetings are as frequent as the pope’s kosher meals,” Brecher said.

Brecher also was stunned by the councilors’ reason: that he voted against projects he didn’t personally favor, even though the projects complied with the town’s land use ordinance.

In his two years on the board, he abstained from voting on one project because he thought it was “so out of scale for the community” even though it met the ordinance requirements, he said.

He voted in favor of all other projects during his tenure, he said.

“I can’t think of a single project we voted down because of my vote or even my opinion” on the ordinance, Brecher said. “If the council acted in the best interest of the community, based on accurate information, that’s one thing. But if they got their information only from one party, then they are doing what they accused me of doing.”

Councilors have denied they were influenced by developers in town who don’t like Brecher.

David Einhorn, a lawyer for The Jackson Laboratory and former planning board chairman, strongly defended Brecher. He said Brecher was well-prepared, thoughtful and thorough, and admitted he often asked hard questions that some people didn’t like.

Brecher was especially tough when considering “a big project that would have a big impact on the community,” Einhorn said.

Einhorn, who “retired” from the planning board this summer after 10 years, forecast the council’s actions would hamper the town’s ability to find people willing to serve.

Perry Moore, one of the four remaining planning board members, criticized Brecher for thinking the ordinance needed interpretation – the root of the board’s problems, he said. He would not say whether he thought Brecher was a good board member.

“The bulk of the disagreements [among members] came when people deviated from applying the plain language of the ordinance,” Moore said Monday. “That’s not what our jobs are.”

Although Bar Harbor’s land use ordinance has engendered many lawsuits and appeals over interpretation of the rules, Moore insisted the language is clear.

“My opinion is based upon my experience, so I think it has some merit,” said Moore, a landscape architect whose earlier career was in municipal planning.

Another concern following the council’s vote centers on the fact that Moore is sometimes employed by Thomas Walsh, one of the town’s biggest developers, and therefore must recuse himself from reviewing Walsh applications.

The town’s attorney has ruled that as long as the four members attend the meeting, even if Moore must step down the quorum is still valid and the vote still legal.

With three members voting, a 2-1 decision would stand, according to town officials.

Brecher said he has been grateful for the support of the public. Many people he doesn’t know have stopped him in the grocery store or on the street to say they thought the council was wrong.