Cranston City Council Vice President Robert J. Pelletier isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

That was the takeaway after a lengthy debate at City Hall last night about the residency issue Pelletier set in motion by moving out of the ward he represents, Ward 4, and into Ward 1 this past summer.

Pelletier abstained from the hastily-scheduled Special City Council Meeting that revolved mostly around the legal issues surrounding his move out of the ward and he sat in the front row of the audience to listen to his fellow council members probe the issue.

But the council took no action other than to refer the matter back to the Board of Canvassers after they were told by City Council Solicitor Patrick Quinlan that they were powerless to decide their fellow councilman’s fate.

“Residency is the gut issue you have to determine,” Quinlan said. “And that is an issue reserved for the Board of Elections.”

Early on during the hearing, Pelletier's Lawyer, Shannon O’Neil, who said she was also at the meeting “as a resident of Cranston,” said the issue is for the local Board of Canvassers to investigate. They can subpoena, force people to ask questions and if they can’t resolve it, it goes to the state Board of Elections, she said.

“There is a laid out track for this and it’s not here at the City Council,” O’Neil said.

The Board of Canvassers punted the issue to the City Council last week after they opted to do nothing in response to an anonymous letter alerting officials that Pelletier had moved out of the ward.

The canvassers must now decide if an investigation should or should not be opened and how to proceed. And that’s despite the fact Pelletier has since moved back into Ward 4.

And moving back into the ward doesn’t make some additional problems go away. Some council members and members of the public admonished Pelletier for not being forthcoming about his move and said the proper route would have been to alert the Board of Canvassers the instant he decided to move.

“He didn’t heed his oath [of office],” said prominent businessman and former Councilman Aram Garabedian.  “He bypassed it.”

Additionally, Pelletier allegedly filed a campaign report listing his former Laconia Road address after he moved — a fact that prompted Councilman Paul Archetto to say there may be an ethical problem that needs to be addressed, prompting calls for a council investigation into Pelleter’s actions.

And Councilman Steve Stycos said it remains unclear what happens to Pelletier's votes at city meetings and what will happen with future votes with the question of whether he has a right to his seat lingering.

Pelletier was not without supporters. Resident Pete Kelleher said Pelletier is a dedicated representative of the ward and should remain in office.

City Council President Anthony Lupino said Pelletier “has the best attendance record of anyone on this council as we speak” and it’s not as if the issue arose in the midst of a public outcry.

“If [Pelletier] wasn’t representing the ward now, if he wasn’t answering emails or phone calls, if we were getting phone calls complaining, I’d be voting to remove him also. But that’s not our job to do here,” Lupino said. “It belongs with the Board of Elections.”

In Pelletier’s defense, Lupino said that Pelletier never wanted to move out of the ward, nor did he intend “for it to take that long to find affordable housing in Ward 4, and that’s not easy to find.”

“I don’t think he wished for a divorce. I don’t think he wanted to lose his home to a short sale or whatever else went on with the bank. I can tell you that by speaking with him, he had the intent of staying in the ward,” Lupino said.

That question of intent, along with how to define “residency,” will likely play a key role in the Board of Canvasser’s possible deliberations.

Quinlan said “residency” is a very litigated term and the case law suggests proving Pelletier gave up his seat by moving out of the ward could be difficult, no matter how clear the City Charter seems.

Eligibility to hold political office is rooted to the right to vote, Quinlan said. It’s not easy to prove someone is ineligible to vote in a particular ward or district and there is a list of guidelines the Board of Canvassers would use to determine residency. Factors such as a person’s address on file, where they pay their car tax and others. So it’s not as if the canvassers can look at the City Charter and say Pelletier vacated his seat by moving out of his ward, Quinlan suggested. Instead, the Canvassers have to approach the issue as if they were trying to prove Pelletier did or did not have a right to vote in Ward 4.

It took more than an hour — including several debates about Robert’s Rules of Order — for that key point to get clarified. And it left the council with no option other than to kick the matter back to the Board of Canvassers and consider starting its own investigation into Pelletier’s actions.