Members of the Infrastructure Oversight Committee were expected to meet Wednesday to figure out their next move after voters last Tuesday rejected a proposed $35 million debt exclusion that would bring sewer and water service to the Route 6 corridor.

In the highest voter turnout at an annual town election in five years, voters defeated the measure 2,209 to 1,335, with just under 26 percent of registered voters casting ballots.

Following the vote, select board vice chairman and IOC chairman Steve Ouellette said it was obvious to him that voters didn’t like the “all or nothing” approach to the three phase project, which was initially intended to be a series of three separate projects funded separately over time. The committee decided to combine them earlier this year at the suggestion of IOC and select board member Manny Soares and several other IOC members. They reasoned that putting forth the entire project at once would help the town with federal and state funding.

But Ouellette said the large dollar amount might have scared some voters, and noted that the IOC vote to combine them was not unanimous.

“We started out only going for phase one (of three phases) (but) the people who wanted all three won out,” he said. “It’s a democracy.”

The only road forward for the project is a ‘Yes’ vote at next month’s Town Meeting, where residents will be asked to support a $35 million appropriation that would give the town the authority to bond for the project. If that passes, the town will then likely hold a special election at which voters would be asked again to approve the debt exclusion — much like what happened with the Diman vocational school funding vote last year, which also failed in its first go around at the polls.

While the Route 6 warrant article is set and cannot be changed, Ouellette said it’s possible that someone might make an amendment at Town Meeting to fund only a portion of the project. That first phase is expected to cost $7 to $8 million.

“There’s a few options,” he said. “I personally think that going all three probably will not work out.”

The vote’s failure likely came as a surprise for Soares, who advocated for the single project approach. At a select board meeting the night before the election, he expressed confidence that voters would approve the measure, and said with the issue soon in voters’ hands, he was looking forward to the next vote at Town Meeting:

“I would just hope that we have some more answers at town meeting, especially if this goes south on us tomorrow, which I don’t think it’s going to,” he said. “To me the whole project, number one, is public health. Number two is the environment and number three, it’s kind of a bonus what the trunk line is going to do for economic development on Route 6.