In the face of possible legal problems and sharp criticism over their actions, Tisbury selectmen this week reversed their decision to sponsor a warrant article reopening the contentious issue of beer and wine sales in the dry town.

The most remarkable aspect of the about-face was the fact that alcohol sales proponent Jeff Kristal, who initiated the move for selectmen to get involved in the matter at the previous board meeting, also initiated the move at this week’s meeting for the selectmen to step aside in the matter.

The latest twist in the four-year dispute followed a letter from an opponent of beer and wine sales, Mary Snyder, complaining that the board, and Mr. Kristal in particular, had failed to observe due process at their meeting two weeks ago.

The meeting agenda had not made any mention that they would be considering the matter, she said, thus allowing no chance for public comment at the meeting.

Furthermore, Mr. Kristal had failed to mention he was part of a group of people who had petitioned to have an article put on the warrant for the annual town meeting, or to recuse himself from the selectmen’s discussion.

The history of the issue is long and tortuous, beginning in 2005, when the Tisbury Business Association first advocated beer and wine sales in restaurants. It finally came to a town vote last year and was defeated by just two votes.

Undaunted, a group of alcohol sales proponents, Mr. Kristal among them, lodged a petition to have an article put on the warrant for the upcoming town meeting which would start the process all over again.

The article is the first in a two-step process. If the town endorses the article, it will allow the selectmen to file a home rule petition with the state legislature, and assuming the state’s approval, the substantive question — whether restaurants with a seating capacity of 30 or more can offer beer and wine with meals — would then go on the agenda for the 2010 town meeting.

The petition alone ensures the issue will be on the warrant, regardless of the involvement of the selectmen, but at the Jan. 13 meeting, Mr. Kristal argued the selectmen should show “leadership” by taking ownership of it themselves.

He was opposed by Tristan Israel, who argued that given the perilous state of the economy, the many other issues on the town’s agenda and the divisiveness of the beer and wine issue, the selectmen should stay out of it.

“The people who want this to happen will carry the ball,” he said.

But Mr. Israel lost when the chairman of the board, Denys Wortman, sided with Mr. Kristal, saying that if it was going to be done, the selectmen should at least ensure it was “done right.”

But because of the petition the article would have to be worded identically to that of the earlier petition. The only thing that would be different was that beer and wine sales would have the implicit imprimatur of the selectmen.

And then came Ms. Snyder’s strongly-worded letter.

Ordinary protocol for meetings, she noted, required that matters before the board should first be on a printed agenda, so the public knew about it in advance, and could turn up and speak.

“This is to allow open and informed debate. Transparency is to be desired and honesty is essential for public confidence,” she wrote. She added:

“Mr. Kristal . . . presented his case without acknowledging that he was a signer of the petition. I believe he should have done so — and probably excused himself. Discussion ensued. There was no input from the public.”

Ms. Snyder acknowledged she was an active opponent of beer and wine sales and also “an active proponent of open government and some semblance of accepted order in the manner in which meetings are conducted . . .”

Mr. Kristal was clearly stung by the criticism at this week’s meeting.

He said he stood to make no personal financial gain from any change to the beer and wine laws. He repeatedly said he served “only one master, the town of Tisbury.

“I would be fine if this board feels we should withdraw our sponsorship of this motion.”

And that is what they did, unanimously, on a motion proposed by Mr. Israel and seconded by Mr. Kristal.

The beer and wine snafu may not have been the proudest moment for the town in terms of transparency, but Tisbury could take some pride this week in another measure of open and accountable government. The town won an award for its presentation of last year’s annual report.

The Massachusetts Municipal Association placed it second in the state among small town reports. Tisbury was the only Island town to win this year.

Aase Jones, the assistant to the town administrator, who does most of the work in its preparation, was on hand to receive the gong at the MMA annual meeting last weekend

Afterwards, she was self-effacing about her role, giving much of the credit to Edgartown’s former longtime administrator, Peter Bettencourt.

“I learned all I know from him, she said, adding:

“It’s a lot of work, but I enjoy it. I think of the town report as a piece of Island history, because it records all the positions held and all things people did to contribute to our community.”

In other business on Tuesday night, selectmen acknowledged the end of one man’s contribution. A letter was received from Ken Garde, who has resigned from the board of public works. He still serves on the board of health.

They also heard good news about the recovery of Main street after last year’s disastrous fourth of July fire. Café Moxie now is expected to be rebuilt and open by the anniversary of the blaze.