The proposed renaming of the Thames River inched forward Friday when the state legislature’s Transportation Committee voted to draft a new version of the so-called “Pequot River bill.”

The roll-call vote was 24-12, with one of the committee’s 13 Republican members siding with the 23 Democrats on the panel.

Rep. Roland Lemar, D-New Haven, the committee’s co-chairman, stressed the vote was “procedural,” meaning it merely authorized the committee to author a bill it will consider at a later date. The bill could call for “Thames” to be changed to something other than “Pequot,” Lemar said.

A negative vote Friday would have killed the proposal.

Lemar said committee members “learned quite a bit” about the history of the Thames River’s name during a public hearing Monday and that the panel’s leadership wanted to gather more input from the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan tribes, which disagree about the proposed renaming.

The Mashantuckets, as well as the Eastern Pequots of North Stonington, support what they believe would be the restoration of the river’s historical name, “Pequot,” which the English changed to “Thames” in the mid-17th century. State Rep. Anthony Nolan, D-New London, suggested the change in a proposed bill he introduced at the start of the legislative session.

The Mohegans object to naming the river the Pequot River.

Lemar said he understood a renaming ultimately could involve the tribes, the state Department of Transportation and the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection working together on an application to the federal government, which oversees the naming of geographical features.

“We felt the request was meritorious,” Lemar said.

Among committee members from southeastern Connecticut, Sens. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, and Norm Needleman, D-Essex, and Rep. Christine Conley, D-Groton, voted to draft the bill while Rep. Devin Carney, R-Old Lyme, voted against drafting it.

Rep. Rachel Chaleski, R-Danbury, was the lone Republican committee member to support drafting the bill.

Osten said the bill, as originally proposed, doesn’t seek to rename the river for a particular tribe but rather to restore the river’s historical name.

“It doesn’t ask the river be renamed ‘Mashantucket’ or ‘Eastern Pequot’ or ‘Golden Hill Paugussett,’” she said.

Carney questioned whether state legislation was necessary to change the river’s name, and cited the Mohegans’ opposition.

“Out of respect for the Mohegan Tribe and their ancestors and the fact they did not make this request and they do not support this name change to Pequot River, I will be voting no,” he said.

Other committee members who opposed drafting a bill said they had received too little information about it and weren’t sure the state should be involved.

“In our process, we draft this bill and all of a sudden we have to do something with it,” Rep. Tami Zawistowski, R-East Granby, said. “I’m really concerned we haven’t heard enough from the other tribal nations and from the public who might be affected, including the tourism industry and towns in that area.”

She said the committee needed a better understanding of the federal government’s role.

“It’s not the state’s place to rename a river,” she said.

b.hallenbeck@theday.com