In a wonderfully weird and short special meeting on the FY15 town budget, the number of attendees exceeded expectations causing the meeting to be delayed until a later date and bigger location. Possibly Thursday, and possibly at a school.
The large turnout for a budget discussion seemed to take the board by pleasant surprise, though there was minor disagreement over what to do about it.
Chair David Gartenstein began the meeting by telling everyone that the discussion of the FY15 budget would begin with preliminary remarks by board members and then he would open the the floor for public comments.
He noted that there were people in the Hanna Cosman room, the meeting room adjacent to the Selectboard meeting room. “Let us know if you can’t hear, or have questions,” he said.
Interim Town Manager Patrick Moreland then alerted Gartenstein to problem. “We have an occupancy issue.” He told the Chair that they had reached capacity in the two meeting rooms and the Assistant Fire Chief told him that the halls were filling up.
“Nice to see so many people here,” said Gartenstein.
Moreland said there were two options: limit the meeting to the stated room capacities, or reschedule and relocate.
“A first!” noted John Allen.
“Let’s try to get to capacity,” said Gartenstein.
“We’re there,” said Moreland, noting that Assistant Fire Chief Lynch said there were another 10 people in the hall.
David Schoales wondered if there was room upstairs for people to watch on television.
Moreland said he could find a bigger space if they wanted to reschedule.
The crowd was a bit restless, awaiting the decision.
Gartenstein told them that the the occupancy limit was 100, and there were at least 110 so far.
John Allen said he didn’t think they should reschedule the meeting.
Gartenstein responded that Open Meeting Law says that people who want to attend a meeting have the right to attend. “If we don’t have room, we have to find a location where people can attend.”
Moreland agreed that there were too many people.
Gartenstein said that the board had been having budget discussions for months and hadn’t had this sort of attendance before. He suggested they find a bigger space and have the meeting on Thursday.
Allen pressed to have the meeting as originally scheduled. “I wonder, if people want to relinquish their spot…”
“We aren’t going to ask people to not attend the meeting and get around the Open Meeting Law,” said Gartenstein. “The meeting will be re-noticed when we can find a bigger space.” He made a motion to adjourn, and wasn’t taking public comments.
Reiterating, he told those assembled that there was going to be no public session Tuesday evening, and that they would continue with the agenda and go into executive session on an unrelated matter. “This will be re-warned. I move to enter executive session.”
The meeting would be warned for a specific date, time and place, publicly noticed in all local media outlets and on the town calendar.
And the board quickly went into executive session.
Ten little Indians?
I don’t know when Chris left, but there were at least 50 people or more in the hallway and stairs leading down to the first floor and more coming in after we were told of the rescheduled meeting!
Yes, many people in the hall
Yes, many people in the hall and people still coming in after the meeting was adjourned -including the very vocal, hand clapping group who entered chanting “People First”. Just goes to show that even a few determined voices can get attention.
Just to comment on another post made in this stream: I think to call David Garenstein’s actions last night “welcoming” is not quite accurate, at least to me. He did seem surprised that so many people showed up ( why he was surprised I’m not sure) but he refused to even entertain the notion of hearing what if any suggestions people might have had about rescheduling the meeting. He abruptly adjourned the meeting; said several times he would not recognize anyone in the audience (even prior to ending the meeting) and showed not the slightest bit of concern that rescheduling the meeting would be inconvenient -at best- for those attending. To my recollection no one was thanked for attending.(Perhaps I didn’t hear that part?) Welcoming? Not by me definition.
VT Open Meeting Law
Here’s what Vermont’s Open Meeting Law says, for those wondering:
(I should add that I used the word wonderful above because so many people came out for the meeting, and weird at how it was over so quickly. Best attended and shortest meeting.)
Unusual circumstances.
Good for David Gartenstein. His immediate reaction upon hearing that there was overwhelming attendance was, “nice to see so many people here.” Refreshing to have a Selectboard Chairman who genuinely welcomes the public.
I am frankly appalled at the distain expressed by John Allen at the inconvenience of open process.
Finally, the procedure around executive session seems a bit fishy to me. It appears that the public meeting never took place, and yet the Board still allowed itself to vote to go into executive session. Executive session can only be called for during an open, public meeting. So if it was impossible to hold an open meeting without denying people the right to be present, then how could the Board legally go into executive session?
Members of the public have a right to hear the motion including the reason for executive session, and to witness the vote. Members of the public have a right to come back into the room when the Board reconvenes open session, even if the reconvening is solely for the purpose of adjournment. And members of the public have a right to comment at any public meeting. So what happened here: The meeting was called off regarding the public’s ability to attend and to comment, and simultaneously the meeting continued regarding executive session?
There was a proper motion for exec session
They did read a motion and vote on it properly – they stated a reason (contract, I believe, but perhaps personnel) and said that it would harm the town if premature… etc. Sorry for not including mention of it.
The other question is intriguing – were they in a public meeting? They certainly started out in one, beginning as usual. They were then interrupted and told they were over the code limits. There was board discussion. Then they postponed, and moved to adjourn but didn’t vote on it, then moved to go into executive session and did vote on it. A bit confusing.
Executive Session
Continuing this discussion from the other day about the Brattleboro Selectboard’s Executive Session snafus; again, tho a resident of an adjacent Town, I have a long interest in this sort of stuff, having chaired our Town School Board & been long involved with Town government. Executive Session does have special rules which seem to trip up many boards from time to time.
I believe it was SK-B who at first pointed out that the Tuesday meeting was not properly warned, because it announced an Exec. Session as a foregone agenda item. Boards do this a lot, but SK-B noted that in fact an Executive Session has to originate in an already-open meeting; the chair has to state the general purpose for the motion (and there are only a few possible items of business allowing for an E.S; the usual one is a personnel issue, others have to do with discussing a contract, a real estate transaction &c.) The board may take no action in E.S. It may informally make a decision on action to be taken, but must then dissolve the E.S. and return to regular, open, public session to take any action.
As I said in my earlier response to the discussion about Tuesday’s meeting warning, I feel a better approach is to indicate on every agenda “Executive Session if Necessary” and put it at the end of the meeting, unless the possible result of the E.S. is an item of interest to the public which would then want to participate in discussion on the matter — not a usual situation; which means that for the convenience of the public it’s much better to put E.S. at the end of a meeting so the public, if it wishes & has already had its say on regular business topics, can go home. (It’s a good idea if the media stays and returns to be able to report on any action.)
It has been noted that the Town re-warned the meeting to try to correct the first, defective warning.
Now, with the unusual situation of the abruptly-adjourned meeting last night, SK-B again correctly raises a red flag about the board’s handling of Executive Session. When the Chair dismissed the public, what exactly did that mean at that moment? Was he (rather improperly!) simply telling the public to leave, but keeping the meeting going? Or did the meeting adjourn at that point? If the meeting was adjourned, then the Executive Session was illegal (or, to be kind, nonexistent.) Did the board re-open in regular session after the Executive Session? Did they take action on the subject of the E.S.? If so, then. clearly, the meeting hadn’t been adjourned. The MINUTES of the meeting should make interesting reading. (Did SOME members of the public remain after the dismissal, waiting outside in the corridor, and were they called back into the meeting when it re-opened in regular session? Did any of the media do likewise?)
Admittedly, Executive Session, which frequently deals with a personnel issue, can be, on occasion, somewhat urgent. An employee of the Town or School District may have done something that requires immediate, possibly legal, action, and the board should know of that as soon as possible. On the other hand, if, for example, Tuesday’s E.S. was to approve a maternity leave, it could have waited until the reconvened meeting later this week. Oh, sorry, the meeting later this week must be a new meeting, right? (not a reconvened one, as the one last night in fact continued until a proper adjournment after the E.S.)