In midst of pandemic, public meetings continue online

In midst of pandemic, public meetings continue online

” I think I’m a fan of it,” Tavares said. “Thirty days back, I do not think I would have stated that to you.”

Because of the health crisis, Guv Charlie Baker last month suspended parts of the state’s Open Meeting Law, which governs how municipal conferences are performed.

That order allows board members to participate in meetings remotely, utilizing tools such as video conferencing software, as long as the general public can follow the procedures as they occur.

Anybody with a computer system and an Internet connection can participate, and software like Zoom allows viewers to essentially raise their hand to make a comment.

Combined with community websites and social media to share info, authorities stated they have the tools to handle the day-to-day service of city government and ensure the public has access to those considerations.

When it comes to Plymouth, not just do town boards and committees meet in the online world, officials hold routine conferences with residents to upgrade them on the town’s response to the disease, Tavares said.

The feedback for the online conferences is “very favorable,” he stated. “There is an audience for it.”

That has caused some reconsidering about how regional boards– which follow strict rules and relatively arcane customs rooted in Massachusetts’ horse and buggy days– could do their jobs, even if they aren’t in the exact same room.

In Newton, City board president Susan Albright said she is preparing to continue carrying out video conferencing of public hearings so more individuals can sign up with.

” I believe individuals may have been a bit shy, but I believe individuals will get utilized to this,” Albright said.

Some, like Somerville City Council president Matt McLaughlin, are hesitant. While participation at some conferences has improved with remote access, and the innovation works well, not everyone has access to a computer and broadband Web for video.

In the past, McLaughlin stated he’s fielded proposals that pitched technology as a way to make it easier for residents to engage with local government.

” I constantly say to them, ‘You are just going to empower the same people who currently participate,'” McLaughlin stated. “The innovation doesn’t necessarily open it up.”

And even as the innovation is rolled out, the procedure doesn’t always go off without a hitch.

In Wellesley, locals who attempted listening to a current Zoning Board of Appeals hearing on a real estate proposition struggled to participate.

In a video recording of the session readily available on the Wellesley Public Media website, 2 callers who joined the video teleconference could not constantly hear what was said, and at least one board member’s connection dropped in and out of the online session.

The hearing was on a proposed five-story apartment complex on Route 9 that would be developed under Chapter 40 B, the state’s economical housing law. There has actually been no final vote on the job.

Robert Soderholm, a Wellesley homeowner worried about the size of the proposed advancement and its traffic impact, said the town should hold back on remote conferences till the issues have been settled.

” Unless something is on fire, and of the highest public interest, do not move forward with public hearings,” Soderholm stated.

Robert W. Levy, the board’s vice chairman, said the panel dealt with little choice since it dealt with a due date involving the proposed housing development.

” I agree, it could have been much better,” said Levy, who led the hearing in late March. “We did the best we could; we are all volunteers.”

Shortly after the hearing, state lawmakers passed legislation that extended due dates for boards due to the fact that of the health crisis. Had that legislation been approved prior to the hearing on the project, Levy stated he would have delayed it.

” Given that we were required to close the public hearing that night, and failure to do so would have caused useful approval of the permit [to build the development], we had no choice,” he stated. “We were between a rock and a tough place.”

Levy, who has actually served on the town’s zoning board for 20 years, said in-person sessions are better: It’s easier for individuals to speak with one another, for instance. Video conferencing might be beneficial for smaller sized meetings that deal with non-controversial topics.

McLaughlin, the Somerville City board president, stated he likewise chooses in-person conferences to deliberate city business, though not every citizen could participate in hearings on matters that impacted their lives.

McLaughlin stated chosen officials in Somerville have been concerned that there are citizens who aren’t participating in their city’s federal government. In the past, officials would go door-to-door and speak directly with constituents.

Now with social distancing, he stated, authorities have downsized and taken to posting fliers with information in regional communities so individuals can be notified. That remains essential, even if some members of the general public now have the choice of plugging into a conference from another location.

” No matter whether it’s remote or face to face, we still have this problem of not having the ability to reach out to all communities,” McLaughlin stated. “We’re discussing it, we try to resolve it to the very best of our capability. It is a systemic concern. We will not resolve it with innovation.”

Boston University reporter Sydney Hager added to this report.

John Hilliard can be reached at [email protected]

Learn More