[Massplanners] [External] Re: continued remote meetings
Harry LaCortiglia
hlacortiglia at comcast.net
Sat Feb 11 09:53:21 EST 2023
Hi All,
It would be very informative to hear from those groups.
However, I would ask the hivemind here if the continuation of Remote
Meetings is something that might_not_ need Legislative action?
I recall that before the pandemic emergency legislation came into play,
940 CMR 29.10
<https://casetext.com/regulation/code-of-massachusetts-regulations/department-940-cmr-office-of-the-attorney-general/title-940-cmr-2900-open-meetings/section-2910-remote-participation>
made provision, under the Open Meeting Law Regulations, to provide for
Remote Participation.
Although quite limited in scope and not very widely used at the time due
to its limitations.I believe it required the physical presence of a
quorum of the boardand only allowed for Board and Committee Members to
participate remotely, not the members of the public or outside consultants.
Couldn't the AG revise the regulations to be more in line with what so
many communities are accustomed to, and now technologically capable of
doing?
Maybe just a Regulations update would do the trick?
H. LaCortiglia
Georgetown P.B.
On 2/10/2023 7:42 AM, Susan Affleck-Childs via MassPlanners wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> Perhaps someone from the Mass Municipal Association or the Mass
> Municipal Lawyers group could weigh in on the status of such
> legislation to either extend or make permanent the provisions for
> remote meetings. The end of March will be here soon!
>
> Thanks.
>
> Susan E. Affleck-Childs
>
> Planning and Economic Development Coordinator
>
> Town of Medway
>
> 155 Village Street
>
> Medway, MA 02053
>
> 508-533-3291
>
> *From:* MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> *On Behalf Of
> *Alicia Hunt via MassPlanners
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 9, 2023 10:02 PM
> *To:* Eric Salerno <esalerno at tyngsboroughma.gov>;
> massplanners at masscptc.org
> *Subject:* [External] Re: [Massplanners] continued remote meetings
>
> Well, I reached out to my legislative delegation, and they acted like
> this was the first they had heard of the idea of extending the rule
> and making it permanent, but they proceeded to indicate they really
> liked it.
>
> I was a little perplexed by their reaction since there was such a
> strong movement last year, that I had assumed that momentum would just
> carry them through to finishing the legislation this year.
>
> I strongly recommend that everyone on this list reach out to their
> legislators about the importance of continued remote only public meetings.
>
> Here in Medford, we will lose several members of our key boards and
> commissions if they no longer have a remote option. We do not have the
> staffing and technical support to provide fully hybrid meetings. The
> best I would be able to offer would be a room where the public could
> watch the remote meeting, and I would still have to staff that space,
> so I’m not even sure about that. In person meetings would also be a
> significant problem for scheduling consultants and proponents. We have
> had a huge increase in public meetings over the past few years and a
> return to in person meetings would make things much more complicated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alicia
>
> Alicia L Hunt
>
> Director of Planning, Development & Sustainability
>
> City of Medford
>
> City Hall, Room 308
>
> 85 George P. Hassett Dr. <x-apple-data-detectors://1/0>
>
> Medford, MA 02155 <x-apple-data-detectors://1/0>
>
> Ahunt at medford-ma.gov
>
> (w) 781-393-2480 <tel:781-393-2480>
>
> http://www.medfordma.org/departments/community-development/
>
> http://gogreenmedford.com/
>
> Twitter: @GoGreenMedford
>
> https://www.facebook.com/GoGreenMedford
> <https://www.facebook.com/GoGreenMedford>
>
>
>
> On Feb 6, 2023, at 2:34 PM, Eric Salerno via MassPlanners
> <massplanners at masscptc.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> If anyone has any ideas on how to collectively (and effectively)
> encourage the new administration to make the remote option
> permanent, I am sure I'm not the only one that thinks it would be
> a good idea. I'm happy to offer any help I can.
>
> <http://tyngsboroughma.gov/>
>
>
>
> *Eric Salerno*
> *Town Planner / Eco. Dev. Dir.**
> Town of Tyngsborough*
>
> 978-743-5361 | tyngsboroughma.gov <http://tyngsboroughma.gov/>
>
> esalerno at tyngsboroughma.gov <mailto:esalerno at tyngsboroughma.gov>
>
> 25 Bryant Lane, Tyngsborough MA 01879
>
> <http://facebook.com/tyngsboroughma>
>
>
>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/town-of-tyngsborough/>
>
>
>
> <http://twitter.com/TyngsboroughMA>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In Massachusetts, the term “public record” is broadly defined to
> include all documentary materials or data created or received by
> any officer or employee of any governmental unit, regardless of
> physical form or characteristics, unless it falls under one of the
> statutory exemptions to the Public Records Law. G.L.c. 4, 7(26).
> Consequently, email is subject to the disclosure, retention, and
> maintenance provisions as required by law. G.L.c. 66
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 2:09 PM Michael McCarthy via MassPlanners
> <massplanners at masscptc.org> wrote:
>
> Alvin,
>
> Yes, but they have to provide "live 'adequate, alternative
> means' of public access to the deliberations of the public
> body." Here is guidance from MMA for the current remote
> meeting provision:
> https://www.mma.org/remote-meeting-extension-for-local-boards-signed-into-law/
> and from the AG's office:
> https://www.mass.gov/service-details/updated-guidance-on-holding-meetings-pursuant-to-the-act-extending-certain-covid-19-measures.
>
> For example, our PB voted to move complete remote each time
> this Act was extended. BUT you should be aware that the most
> recent extension is expiring at the end of March. I have not
> heard about any coming extension, so we are preparing to
> return fully to in-person.
>
> Mike McCarthy
> Asst. City Planner
> City of New Bedford
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MassPlanners <massplanners-bounces at masscptc.org> On
> Behalf Of Alvin Blake via MassPlanners
> Sent: Friday, February 3, 2023 1:46 PM
> To: massplanners at masscptc.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Massplanners] Zoom only meetings
>
> Can a planning or ZBA have a zoom only meeting? I have read
> several different interpretations of current tips
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org__;!!HrHZwXtSIu7ehiYZ!ryb56bQIpXVsurCzQ3TjJUjV_yyA9dfTyGxDlZWbZV79NNxYhKS7P0U10q4dFVrXLD4wc_oC3GvF1E6B2-eDFdXDO0YR79WfSZURhgVU$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org__;!!HrHZwXtSIu7ehiYZ!ryb56bQIpXVsurCzQ3TjJUjV_yyA9dfTyGxDlZWbZV79NNxYhKS7P0U10q4dFVrXLD4wc_oC3GvF1E6B2-eDFdXDO0YR79WfSZURhgVU$>
>
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org
>
> --
> MassPlanners mailing list
> MassPlanners at masscptc.org
> http://masscptc.org/mailman/listinfo/massplanners_masscptc.org
>
> *Please note: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts considers most
> electronic communications to and from public employees to be public
> records and disclosable under the Massachusetts Public Records Law and
> its regulations. *Please consider the environment before printing this
> email.**
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20230211/7e29701a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 28193 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://masscptc.org/pipermail/massplanners_masscptc.org/attachments/20230211/7e29701a/attachment.jpg>
More information about the MassPlanners
mailing list